IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2008 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 265 of 2006(B) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.30851/2001 Dated 26/09/2005 ...................................... APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT NO. 1/RESPONDENT IN THE OP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- REGIONAL CANCER CENTRE, TRIVANDRUM, REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.S.SEETHALAKSHMI, DESPATCHER, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, REGIONAL CANCER CENTRE, TRIVANDRUM. 2. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, R.C.C., REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, TRIVANDRUM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.G.SASIDHARAN CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVASIS THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.A.NO.265 OF 2006 (B) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2008 J U D G M E N T KOSHY,J. Respondent in this case was appointed in the service of the appellant on 20.4.1987. As per the service conditions, grade promotions for the employees are applicable on completion of 5, 8 and 11 years. Accordingly, she was given grade promotions on 20.4.1992 and 20.4.1997. As per the pay revision order which came on 28.7.2000, grade promotion policy was changed and it was made applicable only on completion of 10, 20 or 25 years and it was also stated that the promotions already granted with effect from 1.3.1997 will be reviewed. Therefore, the second grade promotion of the respondent was reviewed and additional salary paid was recovered. When she approached this Court, learned Single Judge held that by Ext.P17 order, it is stated that if the benefit as per the revised pay scale is lower than what is enjoyed by the employee, the same will be protected as W.A.265/2006 2 personal scale. Therefore, the learned Judge gave the benefit of Ext.P17 to the petitioner. Petitioner also pointed out that in other cases where second grade promotion was given before 1.3.1997, the amount paid was not recovered and this is the only solitary case. Because of the wage revision, petitioner cannot be adversely affected. So the financial impact was not very much. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we fully agree with the views of the learned Single Judge and no interference is required in the impugned judgment, and hence, this appeal is dismissed. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE prp J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- 26th May, 2008