IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2010 / 12TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 19418 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.A.MUHAMMED BASHEER, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.V.K.ALIKUNJU, VADAKKEKALATHIL HOUSE, MUTHIRAPADAM, THAIKKATTUKARA, ALUVA-6. (WORKING AS DEPUTY PROJECT MANAGER, UIDSS MT PROJECT DIVISION, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, ALAPPUZHA). BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI.P.G.PRAMOD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.H.DIVISION, ALUVA. 3. ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, WATER SUPPLY DIVISION, KALAMASSERY. 4. RESIDENT AUDIT OFFICER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, JALA BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 693 033. 5. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, JALA BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 693 033. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR SRI.J.KRISHNA KUMAR, SC, KWA FOR R2,3,5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 19418 of 2009 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- A TRUE COPY OF THE ADVICE MEMO DATED 5.3.84 OF THE PSC ADVISING THE PETITIONER FOR APPOINTMENT AS IST GRADE DRAFTSMAN IN PHED EXT.P2- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER AS DRAFTSMAN GRADE-I, DATED 12.4.84 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (G & E), PHED EXT.P3- A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF GO (P).54/99/IRD DATED 19.8.99 THE 1997 PAY REVISION ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT REVISING THE SCALES OF PAY/SERVICE BENEFITS OF THE EMPLOYEES AND PENSIONERS OF THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY EXT.P4- A TRUE COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER DATED 31.7.06 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE AUDIT OBJECTION OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO THE BENEFITS GRANTED TO THE PETITIONER BASED ON EXT.P3. EXT.P5- A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 8.8.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17.3.09 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, CALLING FOR EXPLANATION TO THE AUDIT OBJECTION FOR THE PAY REVISION BENEFITS GRANTED TO THE PETITIONER BASED ON EXT.P3 PAY REVISION ORDER EXT.P7- TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 6.3.09 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT, ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, CALLING FOR EXPLANATION TO THE AUDIT OBJECTION FOR THE PAY REVISION BENEFITS GRANTED TO THE PETITIONER BASED ON EXT.P3 PAY REVISION ORDER EXT.P8- A TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT THROUGH THE 2ND RESPONDENT. (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).19418/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The prayer sought in the writ petition is to quash Exts.P4, P6 and P7. 2. Facts of the case are that by Ext.P11, petitioner was advised for appointment as Junior Instructor in the Industrial Training Department. Accordingly, he joined duty on 25.4.1980. While so, by Ext.P1, he was advised for appointment as Draftsman Grade-I in the then Public Health Engineering Department ( PHED for short). Accordingly Ext.P2 appointment order was issued on 12.4.1984 and the petitioner joined PHED on 3.5.1984. In the meanwhile, PHED was converted into Kerala Water Authority with effect from 1.4.1984. 3. Ext.P9 proceedings of its Managing Director show that the Water Authority had adopted KSR with retrospective effect from 1.4.1984. Based on the above, Ext.P10 order was issued, giving W.P.(C).19418/09 2 fixation of pay to the petitioner applying Rule 28A of the KSR. However in Ext.P10, such fixation of pay was given subject to a clarification whether the petitioner's service in the Industrial Training Department has been regularized by the competent authority. In my view, such a clarification does not arise for the reason that Ext.P11 advice itself show that the petitioner's appointment was a regular appointment. 4. Petitioner continued in service and long thereafter, Ext.P3 Pay Revision Order was issued with effect from 1.3.1997 and the petitioner was extended the benefit giving credit to his service in the Industrial Training Department as well. Subsequently, 2nd respondent issued Ext.P4 audit objection to the effect that the prior service of the petitioner could not be counted for giving benefit of Ext.P3 Pay Revision Order. Petitioner represented for dropping Ext.P4 by filing Ext.P5. However, his explanation was sought which was furnished by Ext.P8. In the meantime 2nd respondent submitted Ext.P7 report that the prior service of the petitioner cannot be counted. It is in these circumstances the writ petition is filed. W.P.(C).19418/09 3 5. Counter affidavit has been filed in which the stand taken by the 4th respondent is that the petitioner joined the Kerala Water Authority only after 1.4.1984 and therefore, rules pertaining to the Water Authority are applicable to him and his pay was not fixed as per Rule 28A of Part-I, KSR. It is also stated that his pay as on 3.5.1984, was fixed protecting his pay of Rs.950/- that he had drawn as Junior Instructor in the Industrial Training Institute. It is also stated that fixation of pay was not in order, since previous service of the petitioner would not qualify for weightage. 6. First of all Ext.P1 dated 5.3.1984 is the advice on the basis of which petitioner joined PHED on 3.5.1984. Therefore, the submission that the petitioner had joined only on 1.4.1984 and therefore, is ineligible for pay fixation under Rule 28A of KSR is incorrect. Further submission in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was not given fixation of pay under Rule 28A is also incorrect, as can be seen from Ext.P10. These are the two reasons for denying the benefit of previous service to the petitioner. W.P.(C).19418/09 4 7. Having regard to the above, Exts.P4, P6 and P7 cannot be sustained and accordingly Ext.P4, P6 and P7 are quashed. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs