IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2008 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31391 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.K.DEVASSY, RETIRED HEAVY DUTY DRIVER, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR, RESIDING AT PORATHUR PALLIKUNNATH HOUSE, MULLAKKARA, P.O.MANNUTHY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL (SR.) SRI.ANIL K.NAIR SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL SRI.V.MADHUSUDHANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMPTROLLER, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVESITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. SC FOR R1 SRI. RENJITH THAMPAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.31391/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is a retired employee of the first respondent University. In so far as this writ petition is concerned, Ext.P4 is an order passed by the 3rd respondent refixing his pay, ignoring grade promotions. The consequential order is Ext.P5, against which the petitioner submitted Ext.P6 representation. Thereafter, based on the Executive Committee's decision, the Dean of the University issued Ext.P7 partially restoring selection grade to him but still that resulted in recovery and that was ordered by Ext.P8. Against the aforesaid orders petitioner has filed Exts.P9 to P12 representations before the second respondent and it is complained that so far a decision on these representations has not been taken. Learned counsel Wp(c).No.31391/08 2 for the petitioner also relies on Exts.P13 judgment of this court, where according to him in identical circumstances, relief has been granted to yet another similarly situated person. Ext.P14 judgment is also referred to in this context. Having regard to the fact that the issue is pending consideration of the 2nd respondent vide Exts.P9 to P12 representations referred to above, I feel that for the present the grievance of the petitioner can be redressed by directing the 2nd respondent to consider Exts.P9 to P12 in the light of Exts.P13 and P14. This the 2nd respondent shall do, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 6 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. Wp(c).No.31391/08 3