IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2011 / 29TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 7425 of 2007(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- N.SUBRAMONIA IYER, RETIRED FINANCE OFFICER, KSE BOARD, TC-50/1352, SATHYA NAGAR, KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-2. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.P.RAMADAS SRI.C.S.ANTONY BENEDICT SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 7425/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.23.1.93. P2. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.26.3.94. P3. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.5.10.95. P4. COPY OF THE PETITION DTD.28.6.96. P5. COPY OF THE NOTE DTD.3.10.96 TO THE SECRETARY, KSEB. P6. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.18.12.97. P7. COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 16.1.97. P8. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.2.4.97. P9. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD.22.8.05 IN O.P.No. 9062/97 OF THIS COURT. P10. COPY OF THE CHART. P11. COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FIXATION OF PAY. P12. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.1.2.07 BY R1. P13. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.29.8.84. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.7425 of 2007 ================== Dated this the 19th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner started service as an L.D. Clerk on 15.3.1963 in the Kerala State Electricity Board. He was promoted as U.D. Clerk on 28.1.1970. He was again promoted on Junior Superintendent on 17.3.1980. In November 1981, he got promotion as Divisional Accountant. By Ext.P1 order dated 23.1.1993, he was appointed as Finance Officer. He retired from service on 1.9.1996. His grievance in this writ petition is that the post of Finance Officer is equivalent to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer and in the post of Assistant Accounts Officer, the petitioner's junior, Sri.Rama Iyer, was drawing higher pay than the petitioner. The petitioner was posted as Finance Officer not on the basis of his option, but he was required to work as Finance Officer since the posts of Assistant Accounts Officer and Finance Officer are equivalent posts. The petitioner's claim for junior-senior fixation vis-a- vis his junior, Sri.Rama Iyer, was earlier rejected on the ground that junior-senior fixation can be granted only between persons in the same category of posts and the petitioner was working as a Finance Officer and Sri.Rama Iyer was working as an Assistant Accounts Officer. The petitioner challenged the same by filing O.P.No.9062/1997. In that original petition, by Ext.P9 judgment, the order of the Board was quashed and the Board was directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, Ext.P12 order has been passed again w.p.c.7425/07 2 rejecting the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P12 and seeking the following reliefs: “i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order calling for the records leading to Exts.P12 and quashing the same. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to fix the basic pay of the petitioner at Rs.5495/- with effect from 28.1.1995 and Rs.5725/- with effect from 1.8.1995 and to give him arrears of salary legitimately due to him with interest at 18% per annum. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to refix the pensionary benefits of the petitioner on the basis that the petitioner was drawing a basic pay of Rs.5495/- from 28.1.1995 and Rs.5725/- from 1.8.1995 and to give him arrears of Gratuity and arrears of pension with 18% interest per annum. iv. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to give pension due to the petitioner based on the Grade promotion to which the petitioner is legitimately entitled under Prayers (ii) and (iii)” 2. A counter affidavit has been filed seeking to refute the contentions of the petitioner, to which the petitioner has filed a reply affidavit also. The parties were heard. 3. As I have stated earlier, the petitioner is seeking junior- senior fixation vis-a-vis his junior, Sri.Rama Iyer, in the post of Assistant Accounts Officer. The petitioner himself has produced, along with I.A.No.408/2011, the Board order dated 19.10.1996 in respect of the claim for junior-senior fixation. From Ext.P14, I find that junior- senior fixation is granted subject to the following conditions: “(i) The senior and junior employees should belong to the same category and should have been promoted to the same category of post. (ii) The anomaly should not be due to differences in weightage. (iii) The anomaly should have been arisen directly as a result of the pay revision granted with effect from 01.07.1993/01.08.1993. w.p.c.7425/07 3 (iv) In case where the pay of an employee is stepped up in terms of (1) & (2) above, the next increment shall be granted after completing the period required to earn an increment from the date of such step up. (v) The fixation of pay as on 01.07.1993 or 01.08.1993, of both the senior and the junior should be got approved by the FA & CAO before allowing such step-up. (vi) The seniority should be checked with reference to approved gradation list and on detailed entry showing the serial number of both the senior and junior made in the service book. (vii) The step-up should be allowed by an authority competent to approve fixation of pay as stipulated in cl.xiii of the Audit circular No.1/LTS dated 17.10.1995.” (underlining supplied) Therefore, among other things, the petitioner should prove that the anomaly in the fixation of pay vis-a-vis that of his junior had arisen directly as a result of the pay revision granted with effect from 1.7.1993/1.8.1993. From the averments in the writ petition as well as the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am not satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case of anomaly in the pay of the petitioner vis-a-vis that of Sri.Rama Iyer as a direct consequence of the fixation of pay as per the pay revision granted with effect from 1.7.1993/1.8.1993. Insofar as the petitioner can claim junior-senior fixation only if the anomaly in pay vis-a-vis his junior had arisen directly as a result of the pay revision granted with effect from 1.7.93/1.8.93, the petitioner cannot succeed in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.7425/07 4