IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3182 of 2005(D) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- VALSAMMA P.JOSEPH, U.D.CLERK, FOOD CRAFT INSTITUTE EXTENSION CENTRE, KUMARANALLOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUKUMARA MENON, SMT.DEEPTHI S.MENON. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE FOOD CRAFT INSTITUTE (KERALA) SOCIETY, KALAMASSERY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND CONVENER OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, FOOD CRAFT INSTITUTE (KERALA) SOCIETY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, FOOD CRAFT INSTITUTE EXTENSION CENTE, KUMARANALLOOR, KOTTAYAM. 4. GEORGEKUTTY ABRAHAM C.ACCOUNTANT, FOOD CRAFT INSTITUTE, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI, ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN, ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ, ADV. SRI.ANCHAL C. VIJAYAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.3182/2005-D: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE GOVT. ORDER G.O. (P). NO. 3000/98/FIN. DTD. 25/11/1998. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. D-16/2004/1042 DTD. 01/10/2004 OF THE R.1. ADDRESSED TO THE R.3. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 2/2004/225 DTD. 06/10/04 OF THE R.3. ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C). NO. 36091/2004 DTD. 16/12/04 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE EXT.P.4 REPRESENTATION OF THE R.4. REFERRED TO IN EXHIBIT.P.4 JUDGMENT. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. DP4/37968/04 DTD. 07/01/05 OF THE R.2. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No.3182 of 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner joined as L.D.Clerk on 30.1.1985 in the service of the first respondent. She was promoted as U.D.Clerk on 22.12.1989. Ext.P1 is the Government Order dated 25.11.1998 in relation to pay scale and grant of time bound grade promotion. It is stated that the said order is applicable to the employees of the first respondent. According to the petitioner, petitioner was sanctioned time bound higher grade of Rs.6500- 10550 from the due date and the third respondent was directed to fix the pay accordingly. The petitioner accordingly got the said higher grade with effect from 1.11.1998 as evident from Ext.P3. However, by Ext.P6, the Convenor of the Executive Committee has proceeded to cancel the higher grade granted to the petitioner with effect from 1.1.2005. It is further stated as follows: “The Higher Grade on Rs.6500-10550 granted to Smt. Valsamma P.Joseph, UD Clerk, FCI, Kottayam is cancelled from 01.01.2005 onwards. The Secretary will adhere to the decisions taken by the Executive Committee on 31.08.2004. He will submit a detailed report to Executive Committee along with Legal Opinion obtained for the WPC. 3182/2005. 2 consideration of the EC. Till then Smt. Valsamma P. Joseph may be reverted to her previous post. This will, however, not prevent the Secretary from granting her eligible time bound grade in the post of UDC as per G.O.(P) 3000/98 Fin. Dated 25.11.1998.” 2. Counter affidavit is filed by respondents 1 and 2. In the Counter affidavit by the second respondent, it is stated as follows: “Vide Appendix-V of the Staff Regulations, Office Superintendent in the scale of pay of Rs.6500-10550 is not the only promotion post of Administrative staff. There is another post viz., Accountant in the scale of pay of Rs.5500-9075 (Scale of pay of Junior Superintendent in Government Service) in Food Craft Institute which is also the promotion post of administrative staff. Therefore, normally the petitioner is eligible for Higher Grade on the scale of pay of Accountant. As per Appendix V of the Staff Regulations of the Food Craft Institute (K) Society, method of appointment of the post of Office Superintendent is by promotion from the qualified candidates among administrative staff and in the absence of suitable candidates for promotion, by direct recruitment. Qualification prescribed for the post is a Degree preferably B.Com., with minimum of 3 years experience int he office management. Since the petitioner has not been appointed/promoted to any managerial post, she has not acquired 3 years experience in the office management. WPC. 3182/2005. 3 Moreover, since one of the method of appointment for the post of Office Superintendent being by promotion from administrative staff, alone does not entitle the petitioner, who is a U.D.Clerk for Higher Grade on the scale of pay of Office Superintendent at the rate of Rs.6500-10550. Further Smt. Valsamma P. Joseph has been granted Higher Grade in the scale of pay of Rs.6500-10550 without concurrence of the Executive Committee. When the matter of sanction of Higher Grade on Rs.6500-10550 to the petitioner came for consideration of the Executive Committee Meeting held on 31.8.2004, it has been decided that the Secretary, Food Craft Institute, will seek legal opinion in the matter and will submit a detailed report including precedence, if any, for consideration of the Executive Committee. Against the decision of the Executive Committee, the Secretary of the Food Craft Institute Society sanctioned Higher Grade on the scale of pay of Office Superintendent to the petitioner without the concurrence of the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee of the Food Craft Institute Society was also decided to trim the total strength of the staff from 178 to 100 in order to curtail the establishment, expenditure on salaries and other items.” 3. It is clear that the petitioner was granted the Higher Grade in the post of Superintendent even though there was a post of Accountant below the post of Office Superintendent. There was also no concurrence of WPC. 3182/2005. 4 the Executive Committee and decision was taken apparently by the Secretary. The prayers in the writ petition are two fold. They are as follows: “(i) issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P6, to the extent that it cancels the higher grade of Rs.6500-10550 granted to the petitioner. (ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to grant the petitioner the eligible time bound grade in the post of U.D Clerk as per Ext.P1 Government Order.” 4. I do not think that the order cancelling the grant of higher grade is to be interfered with. Petitioner was sanctioned higher grade by Ext.P2 order dated 1.10.2004. Ext.P6 is dated 7.1.2005. In the matter of few months time, upon the mistake apparently been discovered, the cancellation has been effected. The reason given for cancellation appeal to me as legal and therefore the order of cancellation of higher grade is only to be sustained. Learned counsel for the petitioner then prays that Ext.P6, in so far as it relates to the finding that this will not prevent the Secretary from granting her eligible time bound grade in the post of UDC as per GO(P) 3000/98 Fin. Dated 25.11.1998 may be implemented. WPC. 3182/2005. 5 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in fact the petitioner has already made a request in this regard on 20.11.2007. If such a request has already been made, a decision will be taken on the same as ordered in Ext.P6 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment by the first respondent. If such a request has not been made, it is open to the petitioner to make a request in that behalf within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In which case, a decision will be taken thereon in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb