Judges : S.SIRI JAGAN
T.K.REVEENDRAN PILLAI - Appellant
Versus
KERALA BOOKS AND PUBLICATIONS SOCIETY - Respondent
Case No : OP No. 30704 of 2002
Decided On : 06/17/2005
Advocates Appeared :
For Petitioner: SRI. KALEESWARAM RAJ, Advocate. For the Respondent: SRI. B.S. KRISHNAN (SR.)
Government Approval - Service Benefits - Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act - Article 20 - Ext.P5 decision of the governing body - Ext.P15 Government Order - Ext.P11 order - Higher Grade - Deputy Manager - Ext.P17 resolution - Arrears
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an Assistant Manager, sought higher grade and redesignation as Deputy Manager after completing 10 years of service. The governing body approved the proposal, but the Government sanctioned a lower grade. The petitioner challenged the Government orders.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that government approval was not necessary for implementing the governing body's decision. It also ruled that the petitioner was entitled to the higher grade and redesignation as per the governing body's decision, and that the petitioner's normal promotion should not be withheld due to the case filed.
Issues: Government approval for service benefits, applicability of Government orders, entitlement to higher grade and redesignation, withholding of normal promotion.
Ratio Decidendi: Autonomous bodies should have the freedom to act in accordance with their rules and regulations, and government approval is necessary only for matters involving policy decisions. Once a benefit has been conferred on employees as a class, it cannot be taken away to the detriment of individual members of the same class.
Final Decision: The court quashed the Government order and directed the respondent to implement the governing body's decision and pay arrears to the petitioner.
The petitioner is working as an Assistant Manager (Typesetting) in the services of the 1st respondent, which is an autonomous Society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act. He was promoted as such with effect from 1-3-1986. He availed of leave without allowances for the period from 14-11-1992 to 12-11-1997 and rejoined duty on 13-11-1997. Thereafter, he completed 10 years of actual service on 1-3-2001. Since all Assistant Managers in the Society were being given higher grade in the scale of pay of Rs.8250-13650 and redesignation of the post as Deputy Manager on completion of 10 years of service, the petitioner put in Ext.P4 representation dated 26-2-2001 before the 1st respondent claiming the said benefits. The governing body of the Society which met on 10-7-2001 approved the proposal of giving time bound higher grade and redesignation as Deputy Manager to the petitioner as was done in the case of other Deputy Managers. However, unlike in earlier cases, the governing body decided to seek approval of the Government for the decision. Accordingly, by Ext.P8 communication, the Managing Director sought the approval of the Government for granting higher grade of Rs.8250-13650 and redesignation as Deputy Manager to the petitioner. This was followed up with Ext.P9 letter and Ext.P10 clarification. However, by Ext.P11 order, the Government accorded sanction for giving higher grade of only Rs.7200-11400 and redesignation of Assistant Manager (Higher Grade) to the petitioner. The petitioner is challenging Ext. P11 as also Ext.P15 order of the Government to the extent it limits the eligibility of the petitioner for higher grade unlike in the case of other Assistant Managers.
2. Both the 1st respondent-Society and the 2nd respondent-Government have filed counter affidavits. Although, the 1st respondent admits that Assistant Managers similarly placed like the petitioner were earlier given 10 year Higher Grade of Rs.8250-13650, since they are bound by the orders of the Government approval of the Government was sought especially in view of Ext.P15 Government Order by which only the time bound grade promotion granted and regulated as specified in clause 5(B) of G.O(P)No.3000/98/Fin dated 25-11-1998 and subsequent orders with effect from 1-11-1998 were made applicable to employees of the Society. The 2nd respondent in their counter affidavit stated that in view of Ext.P15 Government Order, the time bound higher grade granted as per the G.O. mentioned therein only is applicable to employees of the 1st respondent Society which was granted by Ext.P11.
3. I have heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the 1st respondent-Society as well as the Government Pleader appearing for the 2nd respondent.
4. The first question that arises for consideration is as to whether Government approval is necessary for implementing Ext.P5 decision of the governing body of the 1st respondent. The Society seeks to justify their decision to seek approval of the Government on the basis of Memorandum of Association and Rules and Regulations of the Society. The petitioner has extracted Article 20 of the same as Ext.P6 which the 1st respondent admits is the only provision on the subject. The same provides as follows:
SP 1
"Article 20: The following matters shall require the prior approval of the Government.
(i) Appointment to the post of Managing Director and to all post carrying a minimum basic salary of Rs.1200 or more.
(ii) Any programme of capital expenditure which exceeds Rs.10 lakhs.
(iii) Agreement involving foreign collaboration proposed to be entered into by the Society.
(iv) Sale, lease, mortgage or disposal otherwise of the whole or substantially the whole of the undertaking of the society.
(v) Winding up of the Society.
(vi) Foreign tours of officials or the Chairman, Vice Chairman, Managing Director or any other member of the Governing Body.
(vii) Rules regarding the conditions of service of
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.