IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 25TH BHADRA 1930 WA.No.1851 of 2005 ------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN O.P. NO.10734/98 DT.11/01/05 ........... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS IN O.P.: -------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVACIS RESPONDENT/PETITIONER IN THE O.P.: ----------------------------------------------- BENEDICT HAROCK, AMBATT HOUSE, DOOR NO. 45/1710, PACHALAM P.O., KOCHI-12, (TRADE INSTRUCTOR (RTD), MAHARAJA'S TECHNICAL INSTITUTE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J. B. KOSHY & K. P. BALACHANDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. A. No.1851 of 2005 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy, J Respondent/petitioner joined the Technical Education Department as Workshop Attender on 10/10/1962. It was re-designated as Tradesman and he was treated as Skilled Assistant Gr.II on 05/07/1965. It was later re-designated as Trade Instructor Gr.II. According to the petitioner, it is an appointment by transfer and not by promotion. According to the Government, it is by promotion. He continued in the post of Trade Instructor Gr.II for a period of 29 years and retired from service on 30/04/1994. The respondent/petitioner wanted the benefit of third higher grade on completion of 25 years of service. Contention W. A. No.1851 of 2005 -2- of the Government which was earlier accepted by this Court was that after getting three promotions he will not be entitled to the third higher grade promotion as third higher grade promotion is given only to avoid stagnation. But in writ appeal when it was posted, the court noticed that his juniors are getting higher pay and that is an anomaly and it has to be rectified. But instead of considering the question as to whether his juniors are getting the higher pay, the Government rejected the claim by Ext.P5 order. That was challenged in this appeal. 2. The learned Single Judge considered the matter in detail and found that the petitioner is entitled to get the third higher grade with effect from 05/07/1990. When the W. A. No.1851 of 2005 -3- matter came up for admission, the following order was passed by this Court. “According to the learned Government Pleader, the stagnation benefits can be calculated taking into consideration of the entry cadre. It is also admitted that Skilled Assistant Grade-II was re-designated as Trade Instructor Grade-II and there can be direct appointment also. Since the petitioner is promoted earlier, according to the Government Pleader, third higher grade cannot be given taking into account of the earlier promotion. But if a person is directly appointed in the same grade, he will get the benefits. Government Pleader may file the statement regarding whether any juniors will get higher pay than the petitioner because of this, interpretation warranting stepping up of pay.” 3. So far no statement is filed. But it is clear from Exts.P8 and P9 that his juniors who were appointed after he was appointed as Skilled Assistant Gr.II are getting higher pay as they were granted the benefit on completion of 25 years of service. 4. In the above circumstances, we see no ground to interfere with the findings of the learned Single Judge. Appeal fails and is W. A. No.1851 of 2005 -4- dismissed accordingly. J. B. KOSHY JUDGE K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-