IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2008 / 25TH ASWINA 1930 WA.No. 2453 of 2005 ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.5862/2004 DATED 14/01/2005 .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS' UNION LTD., KSHEERA BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN (SR.), SRI.K.ANAND, SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. SUBHASH CHANDRA BABU, ASST. MANAGER, QUALITY CONTROL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DAIRY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS' UNION LTD., AMBALATHARA, POONITHURA P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF DAIRY DEVELOPMENT, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 4. 3. STATE OF KERALA - REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R2 & R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVACIS FOR R2 & R3, R1 BY ADV. SRI.G.G.MANOJ. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. J.B. Koshy & K.P.Balachandran, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A. No. 2453 of 2005 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of October, 2008 Judgment Koshy,J. First respondent was working in the erstwhile Kottayam Central Products Dairy under the Kottayam District Co-operative Milk Supplies Union Limited as a Shift Operator with effect from 1.12.1976 in the scale of pay of Rs.450-785. The Kottayam District Co-operative Milk Supplies Union Limited was taken over by the appellant Union along with the employees and first respondent was redeployed with effect from 1.3.1985 as Chemist in the same scale of pay. A settlement was arrived at on 6.2.1986 wherein an employee is entitled to get grade promotion after eight years of service as on 30.6.1988. It is also noticed that the managing director of the Ernakulam Regional Co-operative Milk Producers' Union has reported that he is eligible for higher grade as per the agreement. First respondent claimed those benefits. As per Ext.P8 proceedings of the Director of Dairy Development, it was found that he was eligible for grade promotion. The appeal filed by the W.A.No.2453/2005 2 appellant was dismissed by the Government. The learned Judge also dismissed the petition. 2. It was contended before the appellate authority by the appellant that the settlement was arrived at after a strike and first respondent did not join the strike and, therefore, the benefit cannot be granted to the first respondent. But, merely by not joining the strike, one will not be disentitled to get the benefit of a settlement which was entered with the Union after the strike. Secondly, it was contended that the claim was placed after 11 years, but, it is a continuing claim and it has effect even on his retiral dues. On that ground alone, it cannot be denied especially having been allowed by the statutory authorities. In the writ petition filed, it was also contended that considering the salary scale, he is in the officer grade. An officer is not entitled to the benefit of such settlement and settlements are applicable only to workman category irrespective of the fact whether he comes under the category of workman as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act. In other words, officers have got separate promotion and wage revision policy. Considering the wages, first respondent is an officer and he will get only the benefits granted to officer category and not as a workman as per the settlement and he is getting all the W.A.No.2453/2005 3 benefits of officer category, but, unfortunately, such a contention was not raised before the statutory authorities and it cannot be raised in the writ petition for the first time. We make it clear that the benefit is confined to the first respondent alone and if any claim is raised by similarly placed persons, appellant is free to contest the same as this question was not raised and considered by the authorities at all. With that observation, this writ appeal is disposed of. J.B.Koshy Judge K.P.Balachandran Judge vaa W.A.No.2453/2005 4 J.B. KOSHY AND K.P.Balachandran,JJ. ------------------------------------- W.A. No.2453/2005 ------------------------------------- Judgment Date:17th October,2008