IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 17TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 30263 of 2006(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.CHANDRASEKHARAN, S/O.C.K.NAIR, (RETD. CRPF. TAILOR), KODUKALAM HOUSE, MUNDOOR P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.N.GOVINDANKUTTY MENON SRI.P.K.SIVADASAN NAIR SRI.S.MADHAVAN NAIR SRI.GNR.UNNITHAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE, C.G.O.COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI. 2. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.MOHAMMED YOUSUF, ADDL.CGSC SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30263 of 2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.8.88 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS. EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2.3.06 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.6.06 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.7.93 OF THIS HONOURABLE HIGH COURT IN W.A.32/93 DATED 13.7.93. (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).30263/2006 -------------------- Dated this the 6th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner who was recruited to the Central Reserved Police Department on 1.12.1968 as Constable/Tailor, retired from service on 30.4.1991. His grievance is that he was denied due seniority and promotion to the rank of Naik/Tailor with effect from 23.1.1984 and as a Head Constable/Tailor with effect from 19.8.1988, on which dates his juniors were promoted in the aforementioned two categories. 2. On an earlier occasion, petitioner had approached Madras High Court in Writ Petition No.2488/1988. By Ext.P1 order, Madras High court directed the respondents to consider the question of fixing the seniority of the petitioner as claimed by him. Apparently, since the directions were not fully complied, petitioner had approached this Court requiring the respondents to assign the due seniority and rank to him in the manner aforementioned. By Ext.P2 judgment, this Court directed the respondents to take a decision on Exts.P5, P7 and P8 W.P.(C).30263/2006 2 representations in the light of Ext.P1 order of the Madras High Court. 3. Pursuant thereto, the issue was considered by the first respondent and Ext.P3 order was passed by which the petitioner was given notional promotion in the post of Naik/Tailor with effect from 23.1.1984, ie, the date from which his junior was promoted to the said post and to the post of Head Constable/Tailor with effect from 19.8.1988, ie, the date on which his junior was released on promotion. Petitioner is satisfied with the fixation of seniority but he is aggrieved by Ext.P3 order in so far as it directs that no arrears of pay would be admissible to him consequent upon such notional promotion. Ext.P3 nevertheless directs that the revised pay fixation will be taken into account for the purpose of computing of pension with other retirement benefits. Ext.P3 to the above limited extent is under challenge in this writ petition. 4. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents supporting the same. It is contended that since the W.P.(C).30263/2006 3 petitioner had not actually worked as Naik/Tailor or Head Constable/Tailor, he is not entitled to monetary benefits consequential upon the assignment of seniority. 5. I heard the learned counsel on both sides. 6. Ext.P3 order acknowledges the fact that the petitioner was senior most in the category of Constable/Tailor, when his juniors working in different ranges were promoted as Naik/Tailor and Head Constable/Tailor. Apparently, petitioner was denied such promotion on the premise that there was no vacancy in the said post in the Avady range where the petitioner was posted. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that obviously it is not the petitioner’s fault that he was confined to the Avady range, where there was no vacancy in the aforementioned post. But promotion to the aforementioned posts were not on the basis of range seniority and this is impliedly accepted in Ext.P11 order also. Going by the designation of the posts it seems to be clear that there was no change in the duties and responsibilities attached to the three posts W.P.(C).30263/2006 4 namely Constable/Tailor, Naik/Tailor and Head Constable/Tailor. If that be so, in my opinion, it is arbitrary to deny the petitioner the actual monetary benefits consequential upon the re-assignment of seniority and notional promotion granted under Ext.P3. 7. In the result, writ petition is allowed. Ext.P3 order, in so far as it provides that though the petitioner is promoted to the post of Naik/Tailor and Head Constable/Tailor, no arrears as such would be admissible, is set aside. It is declared that the petitioner is eligible to the monetary benefits consequential upon the notional promotion granted to him under paragraphs 12(a) and 12(b) of Ext.P3. Same must be computed and consequential benefits should be paid to him. Needful shall be done by the first respondent within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs