IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2010 / 2ND ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17081 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SIVASANKARAN.T.A, FARRIER, I (KERALA) R & W SQN.NCC, P.O.MANNUTHY, THRISSUR (NOW ON DEPUTATION TO BEVERAGES CORPORATION). BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.M.SAJJAD RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL (NCC), NCC DIRECTORATE, STATE WING, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE COMMANDING OFFICER, 1 (K) R & V SQN. NCC, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR. 4. THE OFFICER OF THE COMMANDING, NCC GROUP HEADQUARTERS, ERNAKULAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 17081 OF 2010 (I) ===================== Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Farrier in NCC. Ext.P1 is the order of his appointment. In Ext.P1, the scale of pay attached to the post of Farrier is mentioned as Rs.2610-3680. According to the petitioner, this is the scale of pay that is prescribed for last grade servants, and that for the post of Farrier in Police Service, scale of pay prescribed is a higher one. Therefore, claiming the higher scale of pay prescribed for the post of Farrier in the police service, petitioner made representations to his superiors, and by Ext.P6, he was told that he should move the Government for redressal of his grievance. Thereupon he submitted Ext.P7 to the Government. Response was not forthcoming and therefore the writ petition is filed. 2. According to the petitioner, no pay scale is prescribed for the post of Farrier in NCC and that what is paid is the scale fixed for last grade employees. Therefore, according to him, he should be paid pay scale equivalent to that of Farrier in Kerala Police Service. He also tries to draw support from Ext.P9 WPC No. 17081/10 :2 : judgment of this Court in WA No.691/04. 3. Ext.P1 is the order of appointment. The order of appointment provides for the scale of pay that was available to the post to which the petitioner is appointed. It is also submitted that the scale of pay mentioned in Ext.P1 has since been revised. An employee can complain of discrimination in the matter of pay only by comparison with another employee of similar status and within the establishment. Such comparison cannot be made with an employee who is working in another establishment. In this case, petitioner draws comparison with Farrier in Kerala Police Service, which is a totally different service. 4. As I have already indicated, discrimination can be only within the establishment and not outside. Therefore, the fact that Farrier in Kerala Police Service is earning higher scale of pay cannot be a basis for the petitioner to plead discrimination and claim equality in the matter of pay. 5. In so far as Ext.P9 judgment of this Court in WA No.691/04 is concerned, that again was a case where the allegation was that there was discrimination between two sets of employees within the Department. As already stated, in this case, WPC No. 17081/10 :3 : discrimination alleged is in comparison with Farriers in Kerala Police Service and not within NCC. Therefore, Ext.P9 judgment does not help the petitioner in any manner. I do not find any merit in the claim raised, and therefore, I am not persuaded to direct consideration of claim by the Government. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp