Kerala High Court
Anil Kumar R vs State Of Kerala on 2 June, 2025
1
2025:KER:38628
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WA NO. 155 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 12.12.2024 IN WP(C) NO.41228
OF 2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/PETITIONER IN THE WRIT PETITION:
ANIL KUMAR R.
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O RAMAPANICKER K., THALIYARATHU,
AIYERKULANGARA, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 686141
BY ADVS.
SHRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)
SRI.MANU SRINATH
SHRI.LIJO JOHN THAMPY
SMT.NIVEDITA MUCHILOTE
SHRI.RIYAS M.B.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE WRIT PETITION:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
TRANSPORT (A) DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
2 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KSRTC TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023
WA NO. 155 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:38628
3 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION)
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695023
4 CHIEF OFFICER
PAY REVISION CELL, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695023
5 DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER
KERALA STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
ERNAKULAM DEPOT, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682012
6 DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER
KERALA STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
KOTTAYAM DEPOT, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686101
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.06.2025, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 155 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:38628
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,
&
SYAM KUMAR V.M., JJ.
------------------------------------------
W.A No. 155 of 2025
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 02nd day of June, 2025
JUDGMENT
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.
The present writ appeal has been filed assailing the
interim order dated 12.12.2024 passed in W.P(C) No. 41228 of
2023, whereby the writ petition was disposed of on the ground
that nothing survives for consideration.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits
that the appellant is a person with disability who earlier had
60% physical disability due to blindness caused by diabetes.
During the pendency of the writ petition, the condition of the
appellant worsened and he became 100% disabled. While the
writ petition was pending the appellant had filed a
representation.
3. The learned Single Judge vide order dated
30.04.2024 passed in writ petition directing the respondent
authorities to decide the representation. In compliance there
WA NO. 155 OF 2025
2025:KER:38628
of, the respondents authorities passed an order dated
12.11.2024, deciding the representation and granting some
relief to the appellant.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant further
submits that when appellant become 60% visually impaired,
he was posted as Store issuer Grade II with some light duties.
However, after the decision of the representation it is seen
that applying rule 37(b) of KSR part I, he would entitled to
seek the salary fixed accordingly in Scale VIII, and not in the
Scale II applicable to Store Issuer Grade II.
5. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed I.A No. 2
of 2024 seeking amendment in the pleadings to challenge the
order dated 12.11.2024 issued by the respondents. The
learned counsel for the appellant submits that now he is
working on the post of Store Issuer Grade II, but his pay Scale
has not been protected as per Section 20(4) of the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. In fact the pay-scale has
been fixed at Scale II, even though in the representation it is
mentioned that he would be entitled to receive Scale VI, but
the same has not yet been implemented. Therefore, he sought
to challenge the order deciding the representation.
WA NO. 155 OF 2025
2025:KER:38628
6. It is further submitted that the learned Single
Judge disposed of the writ petition on the ground that the
Managing Directer had considered the representation in which
it is stated that the petitioner's pay in the Conductor category
had been protected as per rule 37(b) of KSR part I. He would
be entitled for the fixed of pay scale according to Scale VIII.
However, said order has not been complied with.
7. The learned Single Judge instead of allowing
I.A No. 2 of 2024 seeking amendment, disposed of the writ
petition stating that nothing survives in this writ petition.
Accordingly the same is closed. On perusal of the order
deciding the representations dated on 12.11.2024 it is seen
that the pay-scale has not been fixed in Scale VIII, therefore,
he has a grievance and which can be redressed only by way
of amendment in the writ petition.
Accordingly, the order passed by the learned Single
Judge dated 12.12.2024 is set aside. This matter is remitted
back to the learned Single Judge for consideration of I.A. No. 2
of 2024 seeking amendment in the writ petition. The learned
Single Judge is requested to consider the said I.A and pass
appropriate orders, and thereafter, to hear and dispose of the
writ petition finally as expeditiously as possible.
WA NO. 155 OF 2025
2025:KER:38628
With the aforesaid observations, the writ appeal
stands disposed of.
Sd/-
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
JUDGE
Sd/-
SYAM KUMAR V.M.
JUDGE
NJ
WA NO. 155 OF 2025
2025:KER:38628
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF DISABILITY CERTIFICATE DATED
27.01.2025 ISSUED BY THE TALUK HEAD QUARTERS
HOSPITAL, VAIKKOM, KOTTAYAM
