IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2007 / 30TH MAGHA 1928 WP(C).No. 39105 of 2003(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. K.P.GEORGE, FAIR COPY SUPERINTENDENT, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR. 2. N.K.SOUDAMINI, FAIR COPY SUPERINTENDENT, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR. 3. T.K.VASUDEVAN, SELECTION GRADE TYPIST, OFFICE OF THE SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS (RESURVEY) THRISSUR-3 4. A.K.LAKSHMI, SELECTION GRADE TYPIST, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR. 5. P.UNNIKRISHNAN, SELECTION GRADE TYPIST, TALUK OFFICE, KODUNGALLUR. 6. K.K.RAMANI, SELECTION GRADE TYPIST, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR. 7. P.NIRMALA, SELECTION GRADE TYPIST, OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM. 8. T.RAVEENDRAN, SELECTION GRADE TYPIST, COLLECFTORATE, THRISSUR. 9. T.K.LEELA, SELECTION GRADE TYPIST, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.BHASKARAN W.P.(C). NO.39105/2003: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, LAND REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 39105 OF 2003 E ------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of February,2007 JUDGMENT Petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P3 Government Order. That order was passed pursuant to the direction of this Court in Ext.P2 judgment. According to the petitioners, there is an anomaly in the fixation of pay scales attached to the post of Fair Copy Superintendent. The stand taken by the Government in Ext.P3 is that the post of Junior Superintendent is that of Deputy Tahsildar in the Land Revenue Department and the duties and responsibilities are entirely different when compared to the post of Deputy Tahsildar. It is also stated that the qualifications are also different. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no difference in the qualifications. Regarding duties and responsibilities, it is submitted that there is no difference since both are supervisory in nature. These are all matters for the petitioners to represent before the Pay Commission W.P.(C). NO.39105 OF 2003 E :: 2 :: so that at the time of next pay revision, the issue could be duly considered by the Pay Commission. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: In the event of such a representation being filed before the Pay Commission, the same will be duly considered before the revision of pay scales attached to the post of Fair Copy Superintendent. (KURIAN JOSEPH) Judge ahz/