IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 6TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 OP.No. 6905 of 2003(V) ---------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.SUBAIR KUNJU, ANAS MANZIL, THOPPUVILAKAM, NEAR BLOCK OFFICE, KAZHAKUTTAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.B.JAYACHANDRAN SRI.P.M.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (C) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION NATIONAL HIGHWAY, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI.M.R.SABU THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/11/2008, THE COURT ON 27/11/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.NO.6905/03. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1. COPY OF THE SALARY CERTIFICATE. P2. COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD.18.7.81. P3. COPY OF THE HALL TICKET. P4. COPY OF THE GOVT. ORDER DTD.12.7.99. P5. COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD.10.1.2001. P6. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.29.11.02. P7. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.11.2.2003. P8. COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD.22.3.06 BY R2. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No. 6905 of 2003 ================== Dated this the 27th day of November, 2008 J U D G M E N T The issue involved in this original petition relates to higher grade which the petitioner claims he is entitled to. The petitioner entered service as a Village Assistant on 18.7.1981. He was granted 10 years' higher grade and 18 years' higher grade, in respect of fixation of pay of which the petitioner raised certain objections. While those objections were being considered, the Government found that the petitioner was given 10 years' higher grade in the scale of pay of Village Officer although he was not qualified to hold the post of Village Officer for want of passing of test qualification. Therefore, it was found that the petitioner was entitled to 10 years' higher grade only in the intermediate scale and not in the scale of pay applicable to the next promotion post. Hence it was directed to revise the higher grade payable to the petitioner accordingly. Exts.P5 and P6 orders in this regard are under challenge in this original petition. 2. The petitioner submits that the finding that the petitioner was not qualified to hold the post of Village Officer is o.p.6905/03 2 not correct. According to him, he had actually passed the test, but he had lost the certificates and therefore, he could not produce the same before the superior officers. The petitioner now points out in his reply affidavit that he has been proceeded against in disciplinary proceedings on the charge that for avoiding transfer due to promotion and consequent permanent relinquishment from promotion, the petitioner had suppressed the fact about passing of the departmental test, in which proceedings the petitioner was found guilty and by Ext.P8 order, the petitioner was imposed with a punishment of censure. According to the petitioner, this would go to show that the petitioner had actually passed the departmental test, which was the qualification prescribed for promotion to the post of Village Officer and, therefore, the petitioner was actually entitled to the higher grade in the scale of pay of the Village Officer. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed in the original petition, which does take into account Ext.P8. The same proceeds on the basis that the petitioner is not eligible for the higher grade in the scale of pay of the Village Officer, since the petitioner was not qualified to hold the post of Village Officer for o.p.6905/03 3 want of test qualification. 4. On a consideration of the rival contentions, I find that the petitioner was, by Ext.P8, actually found guilty of suppression of the fact of passing the departmental test, which was the qualification prescribed for promotion to the post of Village Officer. That being so, I am of opinion that the matter is liable to be reconsidered in the light of the above facts. Accordingly this original petition is disposed of with the following directions: The petitioner shall within three weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this judgment, file a suitable representation before the 2nd respondent-District Collector. The District Collector, on receipt of the representation, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass final orders, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge o.p.6905/03 4 S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================ O.P.No. 6905 of 2003-V ================ J U D G M E N T 27th November, 2008 o.p.6905/03 5