IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 7858 of 2005 (I) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR.M.O.KOSHY, MOOLAMANNIL HOUSE, KARAKKAL P.O. THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. FORMERLY PRO VICE CHANCELLOOR, KANNUR UNIVERSITY, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.SASIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CHANCELLOR, KANNUR UNIVERSITY, RAJ BAHVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO THE CHANCELLOR, KANNUR UNIVERSITY, CHANCELLOR'S SECRETARIAT, RAJ BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE KANNUR UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MANGATTUPARAMBA, KALLIASSERYP.O. KANNUR. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.MOHAMMED MUSTAQUE, SC, KANNUR UTY. FOR R3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R2,R4 SRI. K.JAJU BABU, SC, KANNUR UNIVERSITY FOR R1 & R3 SRI.M.SASEENDRAN,SC,KANNUR UNIVERSITY FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 7858 of 2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12/8/2000 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT UNDER ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.G.S 5-4269/99 DATED 11/9/2002 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT EXT.P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER NO.8054/B2/2003/H.EDN DATED 23/7/2004. EXT.P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15/1/2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT WHO IS THE CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY EXT.P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22/10/1996 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT EXT.P6. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18/7/2000 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT PA TO JUDGE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR .J ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.7858 of 2005 ------------------------------- Dated this the 6th November,2009 JUDGMENT The matter arising for decision in the writ petition is one relating to the re-fixation of salary and allowance of the petitioner. The petitioner was formerly the Pro Vice Chancellor of Kannur University. The petitioner retired as Principal from Marthoma College Perumbavoor on 31/3/2000. Subsequently he was chosen to become Pro Vice Chancellor of Kannur University. Ext.P1 is the order by which he was appointed and accordingly he joined as Pro Vice Chancellor on 17/8/2000. He continued in the post upto 16/8/2004. 2. The conditions of service including his remmuneration was not fixed in time. Later the petitioner was served by Ext.P2 communication dated 11/9/2002 wherein it is specified that he is appointed as Pro Vice Chancellor with effect from 17/8/2000 on re- employment basis and his re-employment pay and allowance will be regulated as per G.O.(P) 721/201/Fin dated 27/4/2001. It is the case of the petitioner that it is highly disadvantageous to the interest of the petitioner. It is also pointed out that petitioner's predecessor in Office Dr.Alexander Karakkal, who also joined as Pro vice Chancellor after W.P.(C).No.7858 of 2005 2 his retirement from service on super annuation, was allowed the maximum of the pay of Professor in Universities as per UGC scale of pay. Along with the reply affidavit the petitioner has produced the said order relating to re-fixation of pay in respect of Dr.Alexander Karakkal as Ext.P6. It is the case of the petitioner that he is also entitled for the re-fixation in tune with the same and the U.G.C. Scheme. 3. The matter was considered by the Government and as per Ext.P3 it was communicated to the Secretary to the Chancellor that the terms and conditions of service of petitioner may be amended to read as follows: “The appointment of Prof.(Dr).M.O.Koshy with effect from 17/8/2000 will be governed by G.O.(P) 171/99/H.Edn. dated 21/12/1999 and his basic pay will be fixed at Rs.22,400/- per month”. 4. Having failed to get any response in regard to the implementation of the same in spite of the submission of a representation as per Ext.P4 before His Excellency, the Governor of Kerala, the petitioner has filed the writ petition. W.P.(C).No.7858 of 2005 3 5. The respondents have filed separate counter affidavits in the matter. In the counter affidavit filed by third respondent University it is pointed out that Government as per Ext.P3 has made it clear that service condition will be governed by G.O.(P).171/99/H.Edn dated 21/12/1999 and his basic pay will be Rs.22,400/- per month. The Deputy Secretary, Governor's Secretariat as per letter dated 11/10/2004 had requested the University to calculate and forward additional commitment on the basis of the said Government Order. Accordingly the university has calculated the amount approximately as Rs.5,54,015/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Fifty Four Thousand and Fifteen only), excluding DA arrears and surrender of leave salary and forwarded the same as per letter dated 2/12/2004. It is also sated that it is for the Hon'ble Chancellor to fix terms and conditions of the appointment based on G.O. dated 21/12/1999. It is averred in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, that the Chancellor had revised the pay and allowance of Dr.Alexander Karakkal from Rs.7,300/- to Rs.22,400/- in the scale of pay of Rs.18,400/- to Rs.22,400/- after obtaining views from State Government . It is also pointed that W.P.(C).No.7858 of 2005 4 all the Pro-Vice Chancellors were not drawing the same salary. It is also contended that the Chancellor is exercising a statutory function. 6. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that even though it was for the Chancellor to fix terms and conditions it is evident from the terms and conditions sanctioned to Dr.Alexander Karakkal that it was tune with the UGC Scheme in terms of G.O.(P) No.171/99/H.Edn. dated 21/12/1999. My attention was invited to Appendix 1 C of the above Government Order. It shows that Pro Vice Chancellor is entitled to pay at the revised scale of Rs.18,400-500-22,400. There cannot be any doubt it is liable to be implemented, in the case of petitioner as he is entitled for its benefit. There cannot be any distinction between persons similarly placed in the matter grant of pay as the Government had adopted UGC Scheme. Apart from the same going by Ext.P6 it s evident that in respect of Dr.Alexander Krakkal, the scale of pay was revised by the Chancellor in the light of G.O.(P) No.171/99/H.Edn. dated 21/12/1999. The claim raised by the petitioner is reasonable, as it W.P.(C).No.7858 of 2005 5 is in tune with Ext.P3 and G.O.(P) 171/99/H.Edn. dated 21/12/1999. 7. Hence the petitioner also is entitled for the same benefit, as otherwise it will result in discrimination. Therefore it is declared that the petitioner is entitled to have the revision of pay as per Ext.P3 and the UGC Scheme. Appropriate orders will be passed by the first respondent re-fixing scale of pay to the petitioner in terms of Ext.P3, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The due benefits will be released by the University thereafter without delay in terms of the said order. No Costs. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE ssn