Promotion grievances must be examined by authorities; petitioner entitled to consideration of notional pay and arrears due to administrative errors.

JUDGMENT :

(S. MANU, J.)

Petitioner entered service of the Kerala State Development Corporation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Ltd. as Assistant Grade II on 4.12.1996. Petitioner was promoted as Asst.Grade I with effect from 1.1.1999. He passed Book Keeping (Lower) test on 19.1.2000 within the two year period of exemption under Rule 13A(1)(b) of KS&SSR. Petitioner completed probation in the post of Asst.Grade I on 24.1.2000. He thus became fully qualified for further promotion to the post of Junior Superintendent/Asst. Accounts Officer. He was provisionally promoted to the said category by order dated 31.5.2000. He assumed duty with effect from 3.6.2000.

2. When final seniority list of Asst./Accountant Grade I was published on 17.3.2001 petitioner was placed at Serial No.26 and the list was challenged by him in O.P.No.15229/2001. By an interim order in the said case this Court directed the Managing Director of the Corporation to finalise the seniority list with notice to all concerned. Thereafter on 20.6.2003 final seniority list was published in which the petitioner was placed at Serial No.31. Consequently, a reversion order was issued on 20.6.2003 reverting him to the post of Assistant Grade I. On 27.6.2006, O.P.No.15229/2001 was disposed. A fresh seniority list was published on 24.11.2006 in which the petitioner was placed at Serial No.30. There arose disputes and all affected were thereafter heard and a revised seniority list was published on 10.10.2008. In the said list the petitioner was placed at Rank No.21. Though the petitioner was eligible for promotion to the post of Junior Superintendent, promotion was not granted as the seniority list published on 10.10.2008 was under challenge before this Court at the instance of some others.

3. Petitioner approached this Court in W.P. (C)No.8524/2009 aggrieved by denial of promotion. By judgment dated 24.7.2009 the writ petition was disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner and all similarly placed persons. By order dated 29.8.2009, petitioner was promoted as Junior Superintendent/Assistant Accounts Officer with effect from 7.9.2009. On 26.5.2010, another order was issued by the 2^nd respondent revising the seniority list of Assistant Grade I in which the petitioner was placed at Serial No.21. Probation of the petitioner in the promoted post was declared with effect from 11.9.2010 by order dated 18.11.2011. Later, he was promoted as Accounts Officer by order dated 13.8.2012.

4. Grievance of the petitioner, projected during the hearing was regarding notional fixation of pay for the period from 14.6.2003 to 6.9.2009 and denial of arrears of pay for the said period, though the petitioner’s original seniority was restored.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the reversion was solely on the basis of mistakes on the part of the employer and therefore the petitioner was entitled for restoration of all benefits. Denial of monetary benefits for no fault on the part of the petitioner is not justified. The learned counsel relied on the judgments reported in Rajappan Nair v. State of Kerala and others [1984 KLT 141] and State of Kerala v. Bhaskaran Pillai [ 2003 (1) KLT 60 ] in support of her contentions. She also pointed out judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C)No.25958/2011 in an identical case.

6. I heard the learned Standing Counsel and the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents also.

7. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that as this Court had disposed of W.P.(C)No.25958/2011 by directing the 2^nd respondent to consider the grievance and to take appropriate decision, th