IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2007 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1929 OP.No. 4828 of 2000(Y) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: 1. N.O. MOHAMMED KUNJU, TC NO.2/1115, MURINJAPALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPLURAM. `2. M.K. ABDUL RAHIMAN, VEMBAYAM, KUTHIRAKULAM PO PIN 695 615. BY ADV. SRI. RAJU RADHAKRISHNAN. RESPONDENT: --------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (FINANCE), FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI K.G. BHASKARAN. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/12/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP NO.8028 OF 2000 IN OP 4828/00 Y DISMISSED 14.12.2007 SD/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER GO (MS) NO.453/96/(95) /FIN. DT. 21.6.1996 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP NO.10484/91W DT. 9.2.98 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.1.1999 FILED BY PETITIONER NO.1. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.1.1999 FILED BY 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.99980/A/RC.B2/99/FIN. DATED 22.1.2000 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. // TRUE COPY// PS TO JUDGE. K. M. JOSEPH, J. --------------------------------- O.P NO. 4828 OF 2000 Y --------------------------------- Dated this the 14th December, 2007S JUDGMENT Petitioners were working as Joint Secretaries on deputation from the State Government to the Public Service Commission. They challenge Ext.P5. It is an order passed by the first respondent rejecting Exts. P3 and P4 representations filed by the petitioners claiming the benefit of Special Pay provided for State Government employees. They rely on Ext.P2 Judgment of this Court. The question relates to the right of the employees to get special pay consequent upon the Report of the Vth Pay Commission. In Ext.P2 Judgment, the learned Single Judge considered the claim of the Joint Secretary and Deputy Secretary and held that the petitioners and similarly placed Officers are eligible to receive Special Pay recommended by the Vth Pay Commission with effect from 1.7.1988. During the pendency of the said Writ Petition, Ext.P1 order came to be passed, sanctioning special pay from the date of the order, namely OP 4828/00 Y 2 21.6.1996. The learned Single Judge has proceed to hold that the petitioners are entitled to get special pay from the earlier dates, namely 1.7.1988 and 1.7.1989. The learned Single Judge proceeded to hold that the petitioners therein are entitled to the benefit from the anterior date. Petitioners in this case have also filed Writ Petition and that came to be disposed of directing consideration of their representations. It was thereafter that Ext.P5 order was passed. It is, however, found that to Ext.P2, petitioners were not parties and therefore, there is no duty to pay the special pay to the petitioners. Learned counsel submits that the stand of the Government in Ext.P5 is unsustainable. Counsel relies on a decision of this Court in Joseph Parakal v. Union of India (1997 (1) KLT 417) in this regard. 2. Petitioners are also Joint Secretaries in the Public Service Commission. No difference is pointed out from the Officers who secured Ext.P2 Judgment. I would think that the petitioners are in correct in their contentions and I think that Ext.P5 is unsustainable and accordingly I quash Ext.P5 and OP 4828/00 Y 3 there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider Exts.P3 and P4 representations in the light of Ext.P2 Judgment within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment, and the amount found due on the basis of such decision on the representations shall be disbursed to the petitioners without any delay. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. K. M. JOSEPH, J. O.P NO. 4828 OF 2000 Y JUDGMENT 14th December, 2007.