IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN SATURDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 27293 of 2007(Y) ------- -------------------------- PETITIONER(S) : ------------------- 1. PATRIC.M.KALLADA,S/O. MATHEW, KALLADA, KADAVOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM. 2. A.P. VIJAYAKUMAR,S/O. KARIKUTTY, AKKARAPURACKAL HOUSE,DOWN HILL P.O., MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S) : -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVES SOCIETIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIEITY (AUDIT), MALLAPPALLY. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. KOCHUMOL KODUWATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING : NS W.P.C.NO. 27293/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBTIS : EXT. P1 : COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.29302/2011 DATED 1/11/2001. EXT. P2 : COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED, 15/02/2002. EXT. P3 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO. EB.(2) 33453/2002 DATED 3/10/2002. EXT. P4 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED , 30.12.2002. EXT. P5 : COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION . EXT. P6 : COPY OF THECOMMUNICATION DATED 21.02.2003. EXT. P7 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED, 15/7/2003. EXT. P8 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.09.2006. EXT.P9 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.C. 25861/06 DATED 3/10/2006. EXT.P10 : COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(RT) NO.205/2007, DATED 21/3/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE NS S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 27293 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 19th day of November, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioners initially joined service as Village Extension Officers. While so, the Public Service Commission invited applications for appointment by transfer to the post of Junior Inspectors of Co-operative Department from Village Extension Officers. The petitioners also applied, but were not included in the short list for interview. The petitioners approached this Court and as per the direction dated 1.11.2001 in O.P.No. 29302/2001, judgment in which is produced as Ext.P1, separate interview was conducted and their names were also included in the ranked list, which, by that time, had already come into force with effect from 21.6.2000, and persons who were ranked below the petitioners were already allegedly appointed. Pursuant to the inclusion of the petitioners in the ranked list, the petitioners were also appointed. They joined sometime in 2002. But, others had already joined in 2000. As a result, according to the petitioners, the petitioners were drawing lesser pay than the others, who had already joined. According to the petitioners, since the others were juniors and the petitioners are drawing lesser pay than the juniors, this Court should direct the respondents to remove the anomaly. The petitioners approached this Court in the matter by filing W.P(C) No. 25861/06, and pursuant to the judgment in that writ petition, the Government passed Ext.P10 order rejecting the claim of the petitioners. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioners have filed this W.P(C) No. 27293 of 2007 -: 2 :- writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “i. Call for the records leading to issue of Ext.P10 may quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari. ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the respondents to refix the basic pay of the petitioners reckoning their date of joining at par with their juniors and also may direct the respondents to disburse salary, corollary benefits and arrears of pay in accordance with the refixed pay within a time limit fixed by this Hon'ble Court. iii. Declare that the petitioners are entitled to get interest on account of the delay in refixing the petitioner basic pay.” 2. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit supporting Ext.P1. 3. In the writ petition, the petitioners have not even stated that while including them in the ranked list, the Public Service Commission had given them an earlier effective date of advice. But, in Ext.P3 appointment order, they have been given seniority in accordance with their position in the ranked list. But apart from repeating that juniors are drawing higher salary, the petitioners have not stated as who are those juniors. None of them have been impleaded in this writ petition also. Even otherwise, the petitioners have not been able to point out any provision of law enabling the petitioners to claim higher scale of pay than the juniors, if any, who have been given appointment earlier to the petitioners prior to the inclusion of the petitioners in the ranked list subsequently on the premise W.P(C) No. 27293 of 2007 -: 3 :- that if they had been included in the ranked list originally they would have received a higher scale of pay . Normally, an employee enters service in the minimum of the scale of pay with effect from the date of joining and even if an employee is given an earlier effective date of advice, that applies only to fixation of seniority, which has been given to the petitioners, and not to fixation of pay. Increments can be reckoned only on the basis of actual service after joining duty and not on the basis of effective date of advice, in the absence of any statutory provision unlike in the case of seniority for which there is a specific provision in the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules.. In the above circumstances, the petitioners are not entitled to the relief claimed for in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/