IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2011 / 21ST POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 30202 of 2010(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.K.VIJAYAN,ENGINEERING INSTRUCTOR, TECHNICAL HIGH SCHOOL, ADIMALI, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.P.P.JACOB, SRI.T.P.GOPAKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,HIGHER EDUCATION (L)DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 3. THE SENIOR JOINT DIRECTOR(PS), OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.30202/2010-A: APPENDIX RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EB4/19985/04 DTD. 21/12/2004. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. EB4/36473/06 DTD. 11/01/2007. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.EB4/29545/07 DTD. 31/12/2007. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.2. DTD. 12/04/2008. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. EB4/37041/08 DTD. 08/01/2010. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE R2(A): COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DTD. 13/12/1965. ANNEXURE R2(B): COPY OF THE WRIT APPEAL JUDGMENT DTD. 29/09/2008. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.30202 Of 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF JANUARY, 2011 J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by Exhibit P2 order whereby the petitioner's claim for second Higher Grade benefits was denied, this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. The case of the petitioner is the following: The petitioner joined the service of the respondents as Tradesman and was subsequently promoted as Trade Instructor. Thereafter, he underwent the course for Diploma in Mechanical Engineering and acquired the Diploma with first class. According to him, on acquiring the Diploma in Mechanical Engineering, he was given appointment as Workshop Instructor in Mechanical Engineering by way of transfer with effect from 6.10.1990 as per the special rules applicable to the Technical Education Subordinate Service. 3. The petitioner was granted first higher grade as per Exhibit P1 order in the light of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C)No.15076/2004 filed by him. On completion of 16 years, he claimed the benefit of second Higher Grade. By Exhibit W.P.(C)No.30202/10 -2- P2, it was informed to him that he was promoted as Workshop Instructor in terms of the relevant Scheme and he is not eligible for grant of second Higher Grade. 4. The petitioner is relying upon Exhibit P3, an order passed in favour of one Shri N.K.Jolly who was granted the benefit after Exhibit P2 order was passed against the petitioner. Exhibit P5 is another order passed in favour of one Shri V.Anil Kumar. 5. The 2nd respondent has filed a statement. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appointment as Workshop Instructor is a transfer appointment and is not a promotion. It is therefore pointed out that the petitioner is eligible for second Higher Grade for 16 years service as per pay revision order with effect from 6.10.2006. The learned counsel also contended that the petitioner is entitled to have a similar treatment as that of the other beneficiaries. 7. It is explained in the statement filed by the 2nd respondent that actually the petitioner was promoted as Workshop Instructor after acquiring Diploma. It is not an entry cadre; but a promotion post. Earlier, he was promoted as Trade W.P.(C)No.30202/10 -3- Instructor Grade-I from the post of Tradesman. Therefore, he had gained two promotions and thus he is not eligible for higher grade benefits. The first higher grade was granted in terms of the judgment of this Court. The method of appointment of the Workshop Instructor is governed by G.O.(MS)No.661/65/Edn. dated 13.12.1965-Annexure R2(a), which shows that it is by appointment from the category of Skilled Assistant Grade I(later renamed as Trade Instructor Grade I) and method of promotion is from the category of Skilled Assistant Grade II. It is further pointed out that the matter is governed by the judgment in Writ Appeal No.2342/2007 and connected cases wherein it was held that the the posting in the post of Workshop Instructor is by promotion and not by transfer. 8. The very same question raised herein was considered by the Division Bench in Annexure R2(b) judgment. Therein this Court after analysing various aspects held in paragraph No.4 that Skilled Assistant Grade-I is actually not appointment by transfer. Various Government Orders were also considered therein. It was held that the appointment in the promotion of Workshop Instructor is by promotion and therefore, the benefit of time W.P.(C)No.30202/10 -4- bound higher grade is not allowed. 9. With regard to Exhibit P3 order, it is mentioned in the statement that steps are being taken to recall the benefit. 10. Evidently, the petitioner was granted first Higher Grade by the judgment of this Court. But, with regard to the second Higher Grade, as contended by the respondents, it is clear that the petitioner is not legally entitled in the light of the fact that he has attained two promotions. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in Exhibit P2 order passed by the authority concerned. In that view of the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn