IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2009 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 6987 of 2009(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- S.SANTHA DEVI, RETIRED SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT, K.S.E.BOARD, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.XI/778, 'SANTHI SREE', MISSION COMPOUND, ROBINSON ROAD, PALAKKAD-14. BY ADV. SRI.N.SUGATHAN SMT.VARSHA BHASKAR SRI.S.PRASANTH (AYYAPPANKAVU) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4. 3. THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4. BY ADV. SRI. K.S. ANIL, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.6987 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 4th March,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner retired voluntarily from the service of the Kerala State Electricity Board with effect from 9.3.1994 while working as Senior Grade Assistant in the scale of pay of Junior Superintendent in the office of the Executive Engineer, Palakkad. Petitioner claims that her pay has to be refixed in the scale of pay of Senior Superintendent with effect from 1.4.1990 along with consequential revision of pensionary benefits. Petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Assistant on 10.4.1975 and was promoted as Senior Assistant in the year 1979. On completion of 10 years of service she was granted higher grade promotion in the year 1989 in the scale of pay of Junior Superintendent. The service of the petitioner from 27.5.1971 to 9.4.1975 was also reckoned as qualifying service for admitting the pensionary claims. This was revised by the 3rd respondent in letter dated 15.7.1997. W.P ( C) No.6987 of 2009 2 2. The Board as per Order dated 5.10.1995 abolished the post of Junior Superintendent with effect from 1.4.1990. In the copy of the Board Order dated 5.10.1995, there was a further direction to the effect that pay of employees who got 10 years or 18 years Grade promotions in the scale of Junior Superintendent before 1.4.1990 or after but before 30.1.1995 may be fixed in the scale of Senior Superintendent by applying Rule 28A of K.S.R. Subsequently by Exhibit-P4 it was clarified that the benefit of revised grade promotion will not be admissible to employees who have retired before 1.2.1995. This was challenged by various employees in O.P. No.19332 of 2008. This Court as per Exhibit-P5 judgment made it clear that the Circular dated 19.1.1996 cannot limit the application of the Board order dated 5.10.1995. 3. Even though the judgment was rendered as above, the Board limited the applicability of the benefit only to the persons who are parties to the said judgment. Exhibit-P6 is one of such orders. Again W.P ( C) No.6987 of 2009 3 some other persons approached this Court by filing O.P.16493/2002 and pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in Exhibit-P7 judgment that benefit was granted. Exhibit-P8 is the true copy of the judgment in WPC No.24248 of 2005 and based on the directions issued therein by Exhibit-P9 the benefits were granted to the petitioners therein. 4. The claim of the petitioner arises in this manner . She commenced service in the Board as Junior Assistant on 10.4.1975 and she was promoted as Senior Assistant in 1979. She was granted higher grade promotion on completion of 10 years in the year 1989. Therefore, she is claiming the benefit of Exhibit-P3 order. 5. Exhibit-P10 is the representation filed by the petitioner seeking for appropriate orders in the matter and to grant the benefit of Exhibit-P3 order to her. The claim raised by the petitioner has to be considered in the light of the judgments rendered by this Court in respect of similarly placed retired employees of the Board. W.P ( C) No.6987 of 2009 4 In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit-P10 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment in the light of Exhibit-P3 and the judgments namely Exhibits P7, P8 and P9. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.6987 of 2009 5 W.P ( C) No.6987 of 2009 6