N SIVADASAN Vs. SENIOR SUPDT R M S TV DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANT entered service of the first respondent on 20.10.65. He was given BCR promotion on completion of 26 years on 6.11.91 by A-1 letter dated 9.10.95. The applicant submitted that he was given an accept the BCR pay scale of Rs. 825-1200 and continue in service till the age of 60 years or to accept the pay scale of Rs. 950-1400 and retire at the age of 58 years which was the normal age of retirement of employees in Group C and above at that time. The applicant exercised the option in favour of the first alternative. Accordingly by A-2 letter dated 14.9.94 his pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 825-1200 and was permitted to be in service till the age of 60. The retirement age of employees in Group C and above was increased from 58 to 60 with effect from 13.5.98 by a policy decision taken by the Government of India. By A-3 letter dated 24.2.99 third respondent's letter dated 11.2.99 doing away with the option from Group 'D' employees was circulated. APPLICANT claimed that with the increase in the age of retirement of Group C employees, grant of option to Group D officials to choose either of the two BCR pay scales became redundant. The juniors of the applicant who completed 26 years on 13.5.98 were granted automatically the higher BCR pay scale of Rs. 950-1400 (pre-revised)/Rs. 3050-4590 (revised). By A-4 letter dated 30.11.99, the scale of pay under BCR Scheme for all the Group D employees was ordered to be Rs. 950-1400 whose replacement scale was Rs. 3050-4590. APPLICANT claimed that he was given an option in terms of A-4 to come over to BCR pay scale of Rs. 3050-4590 in place of his pay scale of Rs. 2750-4400 (pre-revised Rs. 825-1200). APPLICANT exercised the option to come over to Rs. 3050-4590 with effect from 13.5.98 by A-5 option dated 29.12.99 and accordingly his pay was refixed in the scale of pay of Rs. 3050-4590 with effect from 13.5.98. Third respondent issued a further order dated 28.2.2000 which was communicated by the C.P.M.G. Kerala vide communication dated 7.3.2000. Second respondent issued letter No. A-3/BCR dated 22.3.2000 directing to revise the refixation of pay of the applicant in the pay scale of Rs. 3050-4590 and recover a sum of Rs. 1621 from the salary of the applicant starting from the month of April, 2000 by A-7. The applicant was informed of the contents of A-7 and also the fact of recovery of the first instalment from the pay for the month of April 2000. APPLICANT filed A-8 representation dated 20.4.2000 to the second respondent. Understanding that the first respondent would not wait till the disposal of the A-8 representation but would give effect to A-7, he filed this Original Application seeking the following reliefs:

(2.) Accordingly to the applicant, A-7 was illegal and arbitrary as the same was issued without notice to the applicant. Going back on A-4 was illegal and arbitrary. Continuing with two different pay scales for the same work in the same cadre was discriminatory and illegal in view of raising of the retirement age to 60 for all employees.

(3.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the applicant. In the absence of the learned Counsel for the respondents, we have given careful consideration to the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and the rival pleadings and the documents brought on record.