IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13110 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.V. GOVINDAN NAMBOODIRI, E. NO. 411, CLERK CUM CASHIER, NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK, CHUZHALI BRANCH, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.V.VENUGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK, KANNUR DISTRICT - REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI FOR R1 SC SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 13110 of 2010 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK V. CO- ORDINATE COMMITTEE OF SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN EMPLOYEES UNION AND SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK OFFICERS FEDERATION AS REPORTED IN JT 2001 (2) SC 175 EXT.P2- A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).13110/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 20th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that he is an employee of the 2nd respondent, a Regional Rural Bank, sponsored by the Syndicate Bank. According to the petitioner, in view of the directions in Ext.P1 judgment of the Apex Court in South Malabar Gramin Bank v. Co-ordination Committee of South Malabar Gramin Bank Employees' Union and South Malabar Gramin Bank Officers' Federation and Others (JT 2001 (2) SC 175), pay and other benefits are to be revised as and when pay of the Nationalized Banks are revised. Reference is made to paragraph 17 of the judgment in this context. 2. It is stated that as far as pension is concerned, the employees of the 2nd respondent Bank are paid under the Employees Provident Fund Pension Scheme whereas the employees of the sponsor Bank, namely the Syndicate Bank, are getting a much higher amount. Seeking rectification of the W.P.(C).13110/10 2 alleged anomaly and referring to paragraph 17 of the judgment referred to above, petitioner says that he has filed Ext.P2 representation before the 1st respondent in this writ petition. He complains that the said representation has not been considered although the same has been received by the 1st respondent. 3. Taking into account the above submission so made, I direct the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six months of production of a copy of this judgment. 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with the copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs