IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2011 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 15496 of 2008(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. M.RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, SUB ENGINEER (RETIRED) FROM ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, SHORANUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. C.P.JAYANARAYANAN, S/O.C.PORAYAL, SUB ENGINEER (RETIRED FROM ELECTRICAL SECTION, CHERPULASSERY (P.O), PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN, SRI.V.K.SATHYANATHAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, SHORNUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. CHIEF INTERNAL AUDITOR, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, S.C, SRI. K.S. ANIL, S.C, R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SMITHA SUKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.15496/2008-T: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.PS2/862/88 DTD. 11/07/1990 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. PAY FIX.I/91/214 DTD. 20/05/1991 ISSUED BY R.11. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. PSII/862/88 (VOL.II)/573 DTD. 23/08/96 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE BOARD ORDER NO. 3215/98 DTD. 17/10/1998 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF CIRCULAR NO. 1/LTS/98 DT. 06/10/2000 BY THE BOARD. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE BOARD ORDER NO.268/2000/PSIL/862/88 DTD. 31/01/2000 ISSUED BY THE BOARD. EXT.P.6.A: COPY OF THE PAY FIXATION IN RESPECT OF THE SIMILARLY SITUATED METER READER. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE PAY FIXATION ORDER DTD. 15/02/96 OF SRI. GOPINATHAN ACHARY. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE AUDIT OBJECTION IN RESPECT OF SRI. GOPINATHAN ACHARY DT. 13/11/2003. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE G.O.(RT).249/05/PD DT. 06/07/2005. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGEMENT DT. 23/03/2006. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE BOARD LETTER NO.BO(CM)N9.2386/2007(LAS)III/14902 DT. 22/10/07. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE BOARD LETTER PORTION NO.BO(FB).NO.628/2007 (PS1/101/2006) DT. 19/03/07. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE RECOVERY ORDER DT. 28/03/2008 IN R/O THE P.1. EXT.P.14: COPY OF THE RECOVERY ORDER DT. 11/12/2007 IN R/O THE P.2. EXT.P.15: COPY OF THE RECOVERY ORDER NO.SDB.NO.1305 OF 12/2008. EXT.P.16: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF EXTRACT OF LONG TERM SETTLEMENT. EXT.P.17: COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF CIRCULAR DT. 02/02/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: EXT.R1.A: COPY OF THE G.O. DTD. 15/02/2007. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 15496 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 22nd day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are employees of the Kerala State Electricity Board. They originally put in some provisional service in 1981 up to 1987. During that period, they worked intermittently on provisional basis. Thereafter, their provisional engagement was discontinued. Again, they were provisionally employed from 1989 continuously up to 1998. By Ext. P4 order dated 17.10.1998, they were absorbed as regular meter readers of Kerala State Electricity Board. A question arose as to whether they are entitled to count their provisional service for service benefits. They and other employees similarly situated approached this Court by filing writ petitions. The 1st petitioner, along with others, filed W.P(C) No. 37997/2003. During the pendency of those writ petitions, the Government issued an order, whereby the petitioners and others were given the benefit of counting their continuous service as provisional employees from 22.12.1993 for service benefits. Accordingly, based on that order, by Ext. P10 judgment, the writ petitions were disposed of without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to file objections against limiting of reckoning of provisional service from 22.12.1993. The petitioners filed objections in respect thereof. Favourable orders were not passed. But, subsequently, by Ext. P12 Board order, the Board held as follows: “F.15.The provisional service rendered by the provisional Linemen/Mater Readers from 1981 onwards will be reckoned as qualifying service for pension. Their continuous provisional service from February 1989 will be reckoned for weightage, increment, higher grade and leave benefits with effect from 31.7.2003.” The petitioners filed this writ petition seeking the benefit of that W.P(C) No. 15496 of 2008 -: 2 :- clause in Ext. P12 Board Order, which was pursuant to a long term settlement entered into between the Board and its employees. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “i. To declare that the respondents cannot reduce the pay of the petitioners by taking away the fixation benefits already granted as on 31.8.1998 and also to declare that the pay fixed at Rs. 4840/- as on 31.8.1998 is as per the provisions of the settlement of 1998 and it is legally valid; ii. to issue a writ of certiorari or other writ or order or direction calling for the records leading to this case and quash Exts.P13 and P14 in respect of the 1st and 2nd petitioners and all steps taken pursuant to Ext. P13 and P14 in respect of the petitioners herein; iii. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, or order or direction, directing the respondents to allow the petitioners to continue to draw the pay fixed already with effect from 31.8.1998 at Rs. 4840/- along with subsequent annual increment without any objections and without any recovery or reduction, notwithstanding Ext. P13 or Ext. P14; iv. to direct the respondents to grant weightage to the petitioners as admissible to other regular employees of the Board with effect from 31.8.1998 and 10 years higher grade on completion of 10 years of service and 18 years higher grade taking into account the entire provisional service along with regularization, reckoning the provisional service rendered by the petitioners from 1981 onwards for which they were granted increments; v. to direct the respondents to re-calculate the pay as on promotion as Sub Engineers in 2005 and calculate the pension of the petitioners taking into account the provisional service rendered by them prior to 1.10.1994 with annual increments for the purpose of calculating pension, time bound higher grade and fixation benefits etc., W.P(C) No. 15496 of 2008 -: 3 :- vi. to direct the respondents to sanction pension to the petitioners taking into account the entire provisional service from 1981 onwards for which they received annual increments and recalculate time bound higher grade on completion of 10 years and 18 years and re- fix the pay thereafter including at the time of pay revision for promotion as Sub Engineers and pay the arrears of salary and arrears of pension. vii. To direct the respondents to return amounts recovered from the petitioners salary or terminal benefits as per Ext. P13 and P14 respectively.” 2. The contention of the Board is that Ext. P12 can be implemented only if the Government gives sanction for the same. The petitioners have now produced along with I.A.No. 5062/2011 Ext. P17 circular, whereby the Board has informed the employees that the Government had by G(MS) No. 29/2010/PD dated 19.11.2010 granted approval for the long term settlement dated 28.2.2007 pursuant to which Ext. P12 Board order has been issued. That being so, now there is no impediment for the respondents to implement Ext. P12. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to give to the petitioners benefits of Clause F15 of Ext. P12 quoted above. Orders in this regard shall be issued and arrears of monetary benefits, if any, disbursed to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Until the amounts due to the petitioners and arrears due are finally determined as directed above and disbursed, recovery ordered from the petitioners shall not be effected as per Exts.P13 and W.P(C) No. 15496 of 2008 -: 4 :- P15.implemented. If, after the adjustment of the amounts due, still any excess amount is due from the petitioners to the Board, it would be open to the Board to recover the same. S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/