IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2008 / 4TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19050 of 2008(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ E.RAJENDRAN, S/O.LATE T.NARAYANA MENON, AGED 58 YEARS, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT (RETIRED) IN KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, RESIDING AT PARAMESWARAM, WHITE FIELD, VIYYOOR, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR SRI.LEO GEORGE SRI.K.P.SUJESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SC SRI.K.S. ANIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).19050/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner was working as Assistant Store Keeper in the service of the Kerala State Electricity Board (for short “the Board”). On completion of ten years service, he was given a Grade promotion and his pay was fixed in the scale of pay applicable to the next Grade - Store Keeper Grade- II. By virtue of a long term settlement, Ext.P1, Assistant Store Keepers were integrated with the category of Senior Assistants. It seems that the petitioner did not agree to the integration of the post of Assistant Store Keeper and Senior Assistant, because he had already been granted grade promotion by virtue of his length of service. Nevertheless, he and similarly situated persons were subjected to integration. It was found that consequent upon such integration, the incumbent was brought down to a lower time scale of pay. This was challenged by similarly situated persons earlier, before this Court, as evidenced by Ext.P3 judgment wherein the W.P.(C).19050/2008 2 respondents were directed to reconsider the case of the petitioners with reference to the higher grade they were drawing prior to the integration and then to equate them with appropriate posts in the ministerial cadre. Ext.P3 judgment in this regard was affirmed in Ext.P4. 2. Apparently, litigation did not end there, in as much as that, the direction in Exts.P3 and P4 were not fully carried out on the premise that, earlier Assistant Store Keepers did not have the qualification to be considered for integration to any higher post. The order passed in this regard was again challenged before this Court by certain other persons. This led to Ext.P5 judgment. Petitioner filed Ext.P6 representation before the second respondent. Since action has not been taken on Ext.P6, this writ petition has been filed. 3. In my view, the question as to whether the post, which was being occupied by the petitioner, could be integrated to the higher post on the basis of Exts.P3 and W.P.(C).19050/2008 3 P4 judgments, had to be considered, de hors the issue of 'qualification', as has been held by this Court in Ext.P5 judgment. If therefore, the petitioner is similarly situated to that of the petitioners in Ext.P5 judgment, they are entitled to similar treatment. 4. Learned counsel for the Electricity Board Sri.K.S.Anil submits that the claim made in this case is belated. Normally, I would have appreciated this contention and possibly would have accepted it also. But, I take note of the fact that the claimant is a senior citizen and retired person. He is only claiming a benefit, which has been granted to persons, who, according to him, are similarly situated as per Ext.P5 judgment. In such circumstances, the Board may look into the claim made by the petitioner. 5. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P6 representation, in the light of Ext.P5 judgment and take appropriate W.P.(C).19050/2008 4 action within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs