IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2009 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 31145 of 2003(G) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ V.C.JOHN, LIBRARIAN GRADE IV, ST.THOMAS COLLEGE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. MR.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PANAMPALLI NAGAR) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPT., GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THRISSUR. 4. THE PRINCIPAL ST.THOMAS COLLEGE, THRISSUR. 5. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.B.RAMANY BY ADV.MR.LUIZ GODWIN D'COUTH FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.31145/2003 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEARING NO. DT. 7.7.2000 TO THE PETITIONER. P2:- COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEARING NO. DT. 16.8.2000. P3:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SIT RESPONDENT DT. 13.2.03. P4:- COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT NO.F4- 13503/03 DT. 16.5.03. P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(P) 36/71/EDN. DT. 23.3.71. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE TSS T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.31145 of 2003-G - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of May, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner who is working as Librarian Grade IV in St. Thomas College, Thrissur, is aggrieved by Ext.P4 by which his claim for Higher Grade benefits in the category of Grade III Librarian was refused. 2. The petitioner is having the qualification of B.A. Degree and Bachelor of Library Science from the Calicut University. He had completed 10 years of service in the post of Librarian Grade IV and became eligible for Higher Grade in the scale of Rs.5000 - 8150 with effect from 15.4.2000. Accordingly, a proposal was forwarded by the Principal which was rejected by the third respondent. It was stated mainly that Higher Grade can be given only in the scale of pay of Rs.4000 - 6090 in the absence of promotion post of Librarian Grade III in the College. The petitioner filed Ext.P3 representation before the Government. But it appears that before that was disposed of, a letter was issued by the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education to the Principal in the matter, which is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that in the wpc 31145/2003 2 absence of a post of Librarian Grade III in the College, the denial of benefit of Higher Grade is justified. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the view taken in Ext.P4 is on a wrong interpretation of the Government Order. He invited my attention to the First Statutes of the Calicut University to show that Grade I, Grade II, Grade III and Grade IV Librarian posts have been provided therein. In para 3 of the counter affidavit also, it is stated that the qualification and method of appointment of Librarian Grades I to IV are prescribed in the Calicut University First Statutes. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in other colleges the post of Librarian Grade III has been sanctioned and therefore once there is a promotion post in the line of promotion, going by the provisions of the pay revision orders, Higher Grade benefits can be granted. It is pointed out that in certain other writ petitions filed by similarly placed Grade IV Librarians who were granted the benefits of Higher Grade, but which were objected later, this court had directed the Government to take a decision in the matter. 5. Therefore, it is appropriate that the matter raised herein is considered by the Government itself. In that view of the matter, Ext.P4 is quashed. There will be a direction to the Government to pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 on its merits, after hearing the petitioner and the wpc 31145/2003 3 management, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/