Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

P.A.ABDUL RAHIMAN versus REG.ENG.COLLEGE,SECRETARY,PRINCIPAL

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


P.A.ABDUL RAHIMAN v. REG.ENG.COLLEGE,SECRETARY,PRINCIPAL - OP No. 18028 of 2000(U) [2007] RD-KL 11275 (26 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 18028 of 2000(U)

1. P.A.ABDUL RAHIMAN
... Petitioner

Vs

1. REG.ENG.COLLEGE,SECRETARY,PRINCIPAL
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.M.A.MANHU

For Respondent :SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

Dated :26/06/2007

O R D E R

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

O.P.No.18028 of 2000

Dated this the 26th day of June, 2007.



JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the only Health Inspector in the service of the Regional Engineering College, Calicut which is renamed as 'National Institute of Technology'. It is an autonomous body with the Board of Governors. It adopts Government Orders as they may require for the purpose of governing the field of administration.

2. The petitioner, being the only Health Inspector, is indisputably in an isolated post. Relying on Ext.P1 minutes, the petitioner took the stand that he is entitled to revision of scale of pay and higher grades in terms of G.O.(P)No.480/89 dated 1.11.1989. That request did not find favour with the Regional Engineering College, which turned it down, referring to paragraph 3 (2)(ix) of G.O.(P)No.930/93(2) dated 8.12.1993, which is produced as Ext.R7.

3. The stand taken by the Regional Engineering College is that the clause referred to above, in Ext.R7, provides that persons enjoying time bound grades in various posts in accordance with the pre-revised pattern will be given the specific grades of pay indicated in tables I and II as part of Paragraph 3 of Ext.R7 Government Order, and that the petitioner, who was in the revised O.P.No.18028 of 2000 pay scale of Rs.950-1500 was entitled to 3rd time bound higher grade of Rs.1400-2300, on completion of 25 years of service and that such higher grade has been granted to the petitioner. There is, therefore, no legal flaw in applying the said clause in refuting the claim of the petitioner.

4. However, Ext.R4 Government Order, which also applies to the institution, in Clause 3 thereof, provides certain conditions for granting higher grades for posts which are mentioned therein. That Government Order shows that the posts for which there are no further promotions and posts which are isolated posts were given separate treatment inasmuch as in the case of isolated posts, which cannot be brought within the scheme of Ext.R4 or where, there would, therefore, be a resultant anomaly, the Heads of Departments could bring the facts to the notice of the Government for specific orders regarding the scale of pay to be allowed as higher grade, for the reason that the said Government Order does not relate to the scale in which the petitioner is or to his entry scale. The said Government Order may not, ipso facto, regulate the case of the petitioner, even if the Regional Engineering College has adopted that Government Order. But having regard to the fact that the petitioner entered the O.P.No.18028 of 2000 service in 1966 and his entry is to an isolated post, which going by the materials on record, was thought of even being abolished at one point of time, it is appropriate that the Board of Governors of the Regional Engineering College (National Institute of Technology) considers any request of the petitioner to give him any further consolation, though he has already reached and is enjoying 3rd higher grade. Though the petitioner has stated that it was an unfortunate case of an isolated post, these are essentially part of incidents and accidents of service and it is not uncommon that such a situation arises.

5. In the above said circumstance, while finding no ground to interfere with the orders, this writ petition is disposed of directing that if the petitioner makes appropriate representation requesting the Board of Governors to consider extending to him any further relief, such a request would be considered. It is clarified that this judgment does not contain anything regarding the grant of any such relief. No costs. Sd/- (THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN)

JUDGE

sk/ //true copy// O.P.No.18028 of 2000

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

O.P.No. 18028 of 2000

JUDGMENT

26TH JUNE, 2007.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.