IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2008 / 6TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 6463 of 2008(S) ------------------------- OA.675/2005 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGE, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDARY AND DAIRYING, KRISHI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110 001. 3. THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF FISHERIES, NAUTICAL & ENGINEERING TRAINING, KOCHI-16. 4. THE DIRECTOR, INTEGRATED FISHERIES PROJECT, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, KOCHI-16. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR SMT.SOUMINI JAMES RESPONDENT: ------------- P.R.ANANDAVALLY AMMA, W/O. VIJAYA KUMAR, JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, I.F.P., KOCHI-16, RESIDING AT NO.30/1504, HARIKRISHNA, PONNURUNNI, VYTTILA, KOCHI. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 6463 OF 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioners are the respondents in O.A.No.675/2005. The respondent herein was the applicant. The applicant was a Junior Hindi Translator in the Integrated Fisheries Project drawing the scale of pay of Rs.5,000-8,000. The same was upgraded, as per Annexure A3 order produced along with Ext.P1 original application, to Rs.5,500-9,000 with effect from 11.2.2003. At the relevant time, the applicant was working as Senior Hindi Translator on deputation in the Employees Provident Fund Office, Kochi. Later, the respondents took the view that Annexure A3 order will not apply to Hindi staff of subordinate offices, but, only to those working in the Central Secretariat. The said stand was taken as per Annexure A1. Impugning Annexure A1, the above O.A. was filed. W.P.(C) No.6463/2008 2 2. The writ petitioners resisted the application by filing Ext.P2 reply statement. The applicant filed Ext.P3 rejoinder. After hearing both sides, the Central Administrative Tribunal allowed the O.A. by Ext.P4 order dated 25.7.2007. The Tribunal relied on the decisions of other co-ordinate benches of it for rendering a decision in favour of the applicant. The Tribunal also relied on the principle of equal pay for equal work. Annexure A1 was quashed and it was declared that the applicant is entitled to get the benefit of Annexure A3. The decision of the Calcutta Bench of the Tribunal was taken up before the Calcutta High Court. Though initially the writ petition was admitted and stay was granted, finally the matter was heard and the Calcutta High Court dismissed the writ petition by Annexure A1 judgment, produced along with additional statement filed by the writ petitioners. The writ petitioners in this writ petition challenge Ext.P4. We heard the learned counsel, Smt.Soumini James, on behalf of the Assistant Solicitor General. We have perused the W.P.(C) No.6463/2008 3 judgment of C.A.T. as also the judgment of the Calcutta High Court. We agree with the reasons and conclusions in those judgments. No justifiable reason has been urged by the writ petitioners to treat the Hindi Translators of subordinate offices differently. Therefore, this writ petition fails and it is dismissed. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE) ps