IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2009 / 5TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 31670 of 2008(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. T.K.KANNAPPAN, S/O. T.S. KANNAN, AGED 56 YEARS, REGIONAL OFFICER, COIRFED JEW TOWN, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI - 02 2. P.K.PEETHAMBARAN, DEPUTY MARKETING MANAGER, COIRFED, RBCM UNIT, THUMBOOR. 3. MOHAN P. DEPUTY MARKETING MANAGER, COIRFED, REGIONAL OFFICE, PANICKER ROAD, VELLAYIL P.O., NADAKKAVU. 4. ALEY LOUIS, ASSISTANT FINANCE MANAGER, COIRFED, RCP UNIT. BY ADV. SMT.S.KARTHIKA SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI SRI.M.R.ANISON SRI.P.S.ABHISHEK SMT.KAVYA P.PRASAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COIR- MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., NO679, ALAPPUZHA - 688012, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COIR DEVELOPMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COIR MARKETING FEDERATION LTD. NO.679, ALAPPUZHA 688 012. ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN, SC, COIRFED FOR R1 & R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/08/2009, THE COURT ON 27/08/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX Ext.P1. True copy of the judgment dated 16.3.2004 in O.P.No.801/98 Ext.P2. True copy of the memorandum of settlement dated 12.4.2005 between the petitioners in O.P.No.801/98 and the Ist respondent. Ext.P3. True copy of the judgment dated 3.10.2005 in W.A. No.1235/04. Ext.P4. True copy of the order dated 8.6.2007. Ext.P5. True copy of the judgment dated 11.9.2007 in W.P(c). No.25132/07 Ext.P6. True copy of the judgment dated 8.8.2008 in W.P(c).No.8984/08 Ext.P7. True copy of the judgment dated 29.8.2008 in CCC.No.1192/08. Ext.P8. True copy of the argument notes dated 17.9.2008 by the petitioners. Ext.P9. True copy of the order dated 27.9.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent Ext.P10. True copy of the Memorandum of settlement dated 2.6.2000. // true copy // P.A to Judge. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 31670 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioners joined the service of the first respondent in the workmen category. While so, they contend that, they were promoted to the Managerial cadre from August, 2003. In this writ petition what they are claiming is the benefit of Rule 189 (3) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules which provides that all employees of the Society shall be eligible for Dearness Allowance at the rates allowed by the Government to their employees. 2. The background in which they claimed the aforesaid benefit is that, certain managerial employees of the first respondent approached this court by filing O.P.No.801/98, claiming the benefit of Rule 189(3) following the pay revision which was implemented with effect from 1.1.1996. That original petition was disposed of by Ext.P5 judgment rendered on 16.3.2004 directing that the petitioners therein shall be WP(c) No. 31670/08 :2 : extended the benefit of Rule 189 (3), with effect from 1.1.1996. Writ Appeal No.1435/04 was filed by the first respondent against Ext.P1 judgment and during its pendency, they entered into a settlement with the petitioners in Ext.P1. A copy of the settlement is Ext.P2 dated 12.4.2005 where it was agreed to pay dearness allowance, during the period from 1.1.2000 to 31.12.2003 as against 1.1.1996, specified in Ext.P1. On that basis, the writ appeal was also disposed of by Ext.P3 judgment and Ext.P2 settlement was implemented as per Ext.P4 order dated 8.6.2007. 3. According to the petitioners, the benefit of the judgment and the settlement was extended to certain managerial employees and there upon, it is stated that they also claimed the benefit with effect from 1.1.1996 by filing representations. Representations were turned down and thereupon they approached this court by filing W.P(c). No.25132/07 resulting in Ext.P5 judgment which directed the WP(c) No. 31670/08 :3 : 2nd respondent to consider the claim in the light of Ext.P1 judgment referred to above. It is stated that accordingly, the matter was considered and by Ext.P9 order passed by the 2nd respondent, who held that the petitioners were working in the workmen category and therefore Ext.P1 and P2 are not applicable in their case. It is also stated that the employees in the workmen category were eligible only for variable dearness allowance up to 31.12.2003, in terms of Ext.P10 settlement entered into between the management and workmen. It was thereupon that this writ petition is filed. 4. The counsel for the petitioner contends that, admittedly the petitioner are now working in the managerial cadre since August, 2003 and therefore are entitled to parity in payment of Dearness Allowace. It is stated that at any rate the first respondent cannot take a stand that such employees are not eligible for the benefit of Rule 189(3) . However, counsel for the first respondent resist the prayer. According to WP(c) No. 31670/08 :4 : him, the petitioners were workmen until they were promoted to the managerial cadre. It is contended that such workmen are covered by Ext.P10 settlement and if so their entitlement is only for the DA as provided therein. 5. True, when the claim originally raised and dealt with even in Ext.P9, would appear to be for the benefit of Dearness Allowance at Government rate for the period form 1.1.1996. Admittedly, the petitioners were workmen till they were promoted into the Managerial cadre in August, 2003. If that be so, for the period they were working in the workmen category, the petitioners could not have claimed the dearness allowance that was payable for those in the managerial cadre. In so far as the workmen are concerned, they are covered by Ext.P10 settlement and the payment of D.A to the petitioners so long as they are workmen can only be in terms thereof. However, once they were promoted into the managerial cadre, they are entitled to be paid D.A as is being paid to others in the WP(c) No. 31670/08 :5 : managerial cadre. Since those in the managerial cadre are paid D.A, in terms of Ext.P1, the claim of the petitioners for parity in payment of D.A for the period subsequent to their promotion to the managerial cadre cannot be disputed. 6. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pay Dearness Allowance to the petitioners for the period subsequent to their promotion to the Managerial Cadre at the same rate at which D.A is paid to the other employees in the managerial cadre. In view of the above direction Ext.P9 order is set aside. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ “W.P.(C) No.31670 OF 2009” occurring in the cause title portion of the judgment is corrected and substituted as “W.P.(C) No.31670 of 2008” as per order dated 24.11.2011 in I.A.18857/2011. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial)