IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 WA.No. 85 of 2010() ------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.14388/2009 Dated 12/08/2009 .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 3&4: -------------- 1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.H.232, TRIVANDRUM. 2. GENERAL MANAGER, HANTEX PROCESS HOUSE, PAPPANAMCODE, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN SRI.ALAN PAPALI SRI.GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1&2: --------------- 1. ALL KERALA TEXTILE WORKERS AND STAFF FEDERATION, HANTEX PROCESS UNION, PAPPANAMCODE, REG.NO.423/1983, K.T.U.C., NANDANCODE, TRIVANDRUM-3, REP. BY PRESIDENT. 2. K.BAHULEYAN, UNSKILLED WORKER, HANTEX PROCESS HOUSE, PAPPANAMCODE, (AGED 56, S/O.V.KUTTAN PANICKER, HARISREE, PAYATTUVILA P.O., VIA. BALARAMAPURAM.) 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 4. DIRECTOR OF HANDLOOM AND TEXTILE REGISTRAR, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, VIKAS BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM. R1&R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN R3&R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal No.85 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 26th day of May, 2010. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. We do not find any merit in the Writ Appeal because pay revision was done based on Ext.P2 judgment. The surviving grievance after implementation of Ext.P2 is denial of arrears based on Grade benefit from 1.1.2000 to 30.4.2006. Appellants' case is that based on Government Orders concerned members of first respondent Federation and the second respondent are not entitled to arrears. The learned Single Judge allowed the claim because the Grade benefit was approved in Ext.P2 judgment. Further, persons similarly placed were given the Grade benefit with arrears. We, therefore, find no merit in the Writ Appeal and the same is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms