Jude Joseph vs The Principal Secretary
2021 Latest Caselaw 4643 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

    TUESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 20TH MAGHA,1942

                     WP(C).No.31 OF 2021(D)


PETITIONER/S:

            JUDE JOSEPH
            AGED 55 YEARS
            S/O BENEDICT.P.PEREIRA MINI BHAVAN,
            TC, 9/1797, PATTANIKUNNU LANE, SASTHAMANGALAM,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010.

            BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN

RESPONDENT/S:

      1     THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
            TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT,
            ROOM NO 394, 1ST FLOOR,
            MAIN BLOCK SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695001.

      2     THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
            REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT
            BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

      3     THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
            KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
            TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
            EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695023.




            SC SRI.T.P SAJAN
            SR.GP K.P HARISH

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.31 OF 2021(D)
                                2




                          JUDGMENT

The petitioner is an employee of the KSRTC posted

as vehicle supervisor. The grievance of the petitioner is

that, the second respondent - Corporation is still giving

salary to the employees according to 2012 pay revision.

Due to non implementation of the 11th pay revision and

disparity in fixing the pay scale on the basis of cadre of

promotion, the petitioner is drawing low salary , it was

contended. Accordingly, Ext.P3 representation was

submitted before the CMD, seeking revision of salary.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned standing counsel for the KSRTC.

Considering the limited prayer sought by the petitioner,

I am inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition itself by

directing the third respondent to consider Ext.P3 as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of

six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this WP(C).No.31 OF 2021(D)

judgment.

Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

R.AV WP(C).No.31 OF 2021(D)

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(CIVIL) NO.33151/2015 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATI0N DATED 03.12.2020 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17/09/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE TEH 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA ON 27/10/2020.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF SALARY SLIPS OF GOPALAKRISHNAN G ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT CORPORATION.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF SALARY SLIPS OF DILEEP KUMAR .D ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT CORPORATION.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS NIL