IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2010 / 7TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2517 of 2010(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. KERALA GOVERNMENT PRESSES WORKERS CONGRESS[INTUCI], GOVT.PRESS, KAKKANADU P.O., ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 30, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, P.R, PAVITHRAN, PRINTER GRADE - 1, GOVT. PRESS, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM. 2. P.R. PAVITHRAN, PRINTER GRADE - 1, GOVT. PRESS, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPT. OF FINANCE, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPT. OF HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 2517 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT The first petitioner is a recognised union of the employees of the Kerala Government Press Workers, affiliated to Indian National Trade Union Congress No.4130/70. The second petitioner is the Secretary of that union and he is working as First Grade Printer in the Government Press, Ernakulam. The grievance of the petitioners pertains to the action on the part of the respondents in not extending to them the benefits of House Rent Allowance (for short “H.R.A.”) and City Compensatory Allowance (for short “C.C.A.”), which benefits are extended to the employees of the Civil Station, Kakkanad as per Exts.P6 and P7. It is their further contention that similar benefits have already been extended to the employees of the Kerala State Electricity Board working in the office at Kakkanad, as per Ext.P8 and also to those employees of the KBPS, as per Ext.P9. According to the petitioners, they have raised their grievance in the matter in the light of the aforesaid orders issued in favour of employees belonging to different establishments, as per Ext.P13, but the same was W.P.(C) NO.2517/2010 2 not properly adverted to by the respondents. To alleviate their grievance, they had approached this Court earlier by filing W.P. No. 27977 of 2009. The said Writ Petition was disposed of as per Ext.P14 judgment with a direction to the first respondent therein to consider Exts.P12 and P13 representations in the light of Exts.P6 to P9 therein. In compliance with the direction in Ext.P14 judgment, Ext.P15 order dated 18.12.2009 has now been passed. As per Ext.P15, the request of the petitioners for higher rate of H.R.A. and C.C.A. , based on Exts.P6 and P9 was rejected. It is stated in Ext.P15 that Exts.P6 and P7 orders mentioned in that Writ Petition were issued in favour of the employees working in the Civil Station, considering the fact that the Civil Station was translocated from the Corporation area to the Panchayat area. It is further stated in Ext.P15 that Exts.P8 and P9 mentioned therein are related to autonomous bodies. Ext.P1 would reveal that the office in which the second petitioner is working was originally located within the Corporation area and was later translocated to Kakkanad. 2. If the employees of the Civil Station are entitled to get higher rate of H.R.A. and C.C.A. based on the fact that the Civil Station was translocated from the Corporation area to the Panchayat area, there is no reason to deny that benefit to the second petitioner, it is submitted. W.P.(C) NO.2517/2010 3 Ext.P15 would reveal that the fact that the office in which the second petitioner is working was originally located within the Corporation area and was later translocated from the Corporation area to the Panchayat area was not taken into account by the first respondent while passing the said order. It is a relevant factor which should have been looked into by the first respondent, while considering the claim of the second petitioner for higher rate of H.R.A. and C.C.A. 3. In the circumstances, Ext.P15 order is quashed and the first respondent is directed to consider the fact mentioned above and pass fresh orders on the request of the second petitioner for getting higher rate of H.R.A. and C.C.A. Orders in terms of this direction shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) sp/ W.P.(C) NO.2517/2010 4 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C) NO. 2517/2010 JUDGMENT 27th January, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.2517/2010 5