IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 W.A.No. 2623 of 2007() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP.35511/2001 Dated 28/06/2007 APPELLANTS: RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN THE ORIGINAL PETITION --------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, 16-20, BARAKHAMBA LANE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE ZONAL MANAGER (SOUTH), FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, NO.2, HADDOWS ROAD, CHENNAI-600 006. 3. THE SENIOR REGIONAL MANAGER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-694 004. BY ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN, STANDING COUNSEL, FCI RESPONDENT: PETITIONER IN ORIGINAL PETITION ------------------------------------------------------ K.R.PUSHPADHARAN, ASSISTANT GRADE-I (GENERAL), FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, DISTRICT OFFICE (STORAGE), ERNAKULAM, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.N.SANTHA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 2623 OF 2007 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The respondents in the Writ Petition are the appellants. The Writ Petition was filed by the respondent herein, praying for a direction to the appellants to fix his pay on promotion as Assistant Grade I (General) in accordance with Regulation 82 of the Food Corporation of India Staff Regulations, 1971 and grant him consequential benefits. The respondents in the Writ Petition, who are the appellants herein, resisted the said prayer contending that the writ petitioner was given promotion in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, as contemplated under Sections 2(p) and 18(1)of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and so he is not entitled to fixation of pay under Regulation 82. The learned Single Judge took the view that the settlement under the Industrial Disputes Act cannot override the benefits flowing from the statutory regulations and based on that finding, the Writ Petition was allowed and fixation of pay of the petitioner as provided under Regulation 82 of the Food Corporation of India Staff Regulations,1971 was ordered. Challenging the said judgment, this Writ W.A. NO. 2623/2007 2 Appeal is filed. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that in terms of the memorandum of settlement, the Food Corporation of India Staff Regulations, 1971 has been suitably amended and, therefore, the judgment under appeal is not sustainable. But, we notice that the appellants did not have such a case in the counter affidavit filed in the Original Petition or in the grounds taken in this appeal memorandum. The learned counsel has failed to bring to our notice any amended regulation regarding fixation of pay of those persons who were promoted pursuant to the settlement between the Management and the workmen. In view of the above position, we find no ground to interfere with the judgment under appeal. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is dismissed. (K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ W.A. NO. 2623/2007 3 K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. W.A. NO.2623/2007 JUDGMENT 7th August, 2009 W.A. NO. 2623/2007 4