IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2010 / 1ST ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29306 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.P.SURESH BABU, SENIOR ASSISTANT, ELECTRICAL DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV.K.S.ANIL SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2010, A/W. W.P.(C).No. 29398/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).Nos.29306 & 29398 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners were suspended from service on 29.8.2005. At that time, they were in the scale of pay of Rs.4160-7825 and they were paid subsistence allowance in that scale of pay. Subsequently, by the long term settlement of 2007, their pay scale was revised to Rs.6765-12615 with effect from 1.8.2003 retrospectively. The petitioners' contention in these writ petitions is that because of the retrospective promotion of salary, they are entitled to get subsistence allowance on the basis of the revised scale of pay in view of the decision of this Court in Savithri.A.N. v. Authority under the Kerala Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act and another [ILR 2008 (2) Ker.723]. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions seeking the following reliefs: W.P.(C).No. 29306/2010: “i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order to quash Ext.P5 order of the respondent. ii) direct the respondent to to pay the subsistence allowance with arrears as per the pay scale revised with effect from 1.8.2003, within two weeks; iii) declare that the petitioner is entitled to get the subsistence allowance based on the pay revised as per Exts.P1 and P2.” W.P.(C).No. 29398/2010: “i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order to quash Ext.P5 order of the respondent. ii) direct the respondent to to pay the subsistence allowance with arrears as per the pay scale revised with effect from 1.8.2003, within two weeks; w.p.c.29306/10 & cc 2 iii) declare that the petitioner is entitled to get the subsistence allowance based on the pay revised as per Exts.P1 and P2.” 2. I have heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the Kerala State Electricity Board also. 3. In view of the above facts which are not disputed, the 1st respondent shall consider the claim of the petitioners for revised subsistence allowance, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. While doing so, the 1st respondent shall consider the applicability of the above decision to the petitioners' case. If the 1st respondent comes to a conclusion in favour of the petitioners based on the abovesaid judgment, the impugned orders shall be modified accordingly. The writ petitions are disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge