✦ High Court of India · 01 Apr 2009

G. RAJASEKHARAN NAIR v. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

Case Details High Court of India · 01 Apr 2009
Court
High Court of India
Decided
01 Apr 2009
Length
1,305 words

O.P. No. 26632/2002. -: 3 :-entitled to have his deputation period counted for grade promotionand increments. The petitioner points out that, relying on Ext. P1grade promotion rules (which is as per the settlement approved by theGovernment), although it is stated that service in posts outside theapproved channel will not be taken as qualifying service for gradepromotion, that would be applicable only when an employee hasservice in two different departments of the Kerala State RoadTransport Corporation which, are not in the approved channel as isevident from sub-clause (c) thereof. The petitioner therefore wouldcontend that he is entitled to have his deputation period counted forthe purpose of grade promotion and increments.3. No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents.4. I have heard the parties.5. Ext. P1(a) is the terms and conditions of deputation ofemployees of the Corporation. Clause (2) thereof reads thus:“(2)He will retain his lien and rank in the Corporation and will beeligible for any increment on promotion failing due during theperiod of deputation.”By Ext. P8, Government has already decided that as per the provisionsof K.S & S.S.R and K.S.R, the petitioner is entitled to get hisdeputation period counted for promotion, if there are no provisionscontrary to the above in memorandum of settlement approved by theGovernment as if he was not absent from service. Clause 9(a) ofExt. P 9 grade promotion rules reads thus:“9. (a) Service from the date of absorption/appointment to regularestablishment on a scale of pay in the entry grade alone will becounted as service qualifying for grade promotion. Servicerendered prior to the date of such absorption to the entry gradesuch as Daily Wages Service and service in posts outside the O.P. No. 26632/2002. -: 4 :-approved channel will not be taken as qualifying service for gradepromotion.”Rule (c) thereof reads thus:“(c) Approved channel of regular promotion for eachcategory allowed as per Agreement, is furnished in the Chartappended. Service in posts outside such prescribed channels ofpromotion shall not be counted as qualifying service.Eg: (i) Service as work Assistant will not be counted asqualifying service for the grade promotion of Electrician II Grade,as the regular channel of his promotion is Mechanic II Grade.(ii)Service as Conductor II Grade will not be counted asqualifying service for grade promotion from the post of L.D. Clerkas it is outside the regular channel of promotion to the post.(iii)Previous service of a Stenographer II Grade as L.D. Typistwill not be counted as qualifying service for grade promotion toStenographer I Grade.6. I am of opinion that these rules have to be read inconjunction with Ext. P1(a). Ext. P1(a) categorically states thatdeputation period would be counted for the purpose of increment onpromotion falling due during the period of deputation. As rightlypointed out by counsel for the petitioner, Rule 9(a) of Ext. P9 asexplained by Rule 9(c) is applicable only when a Kerala State RoadTransport Corporation employee puts in service in different channelsof promotion in Kerala State Road Transport Corporation itself. Whenthere is a specific rule regarding deputation, I do not think thatclause 9(a) of Ext. P9 can govern the issue. If that be so, thepetitioner is entitled to count his deputation for the purpose ofpromotion. In that view Exts. P6 and P7 are unsustainable. Accordingly, thesame are quashed. The 1st respondent is directed to re-fix the O.P. No. 26632/2002. -: 5 :-petitioner's pay granting the promotions which fell due to thepetitioner during his period of deputation, taking into account theservice on deputation also. Orders in this regard shall be passed andarrears of salary and retirement benefits due to the petitioner arisingtherefrom shall be disbursed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment. The original petition is allowed as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.Tds/

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments