[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Loushan.P.M vs The High Court Of Kerala on 10 February, 2026
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
2026:KER:11068
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 21ST MAGHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 26938 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 LOUSHAN P.M.
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O.MARTIN P.S., ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN, RESIDING AT PUNNACKAL HOUSE,
ANDHAKARANAZHI P.O., CHERTHALA,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 682031
2 ANAS V.S.
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O.SAIDALAVI.V.K, ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN
RESIDING AT VADAKKE VITTAL, EDAVANAKAD,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
3 RAMANARAYANAN V.M.
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O.NARAYANAN, ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN
RESIDING AT KALLAMBILLI HOUSE,
PAZHACHI PILATHARA, KANNUR, PIN - 682031
4 MAHESH K.S.
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O.K.N.SUKUMARAN, ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN
RESIDING AT KOLLIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,
AMBALLOOR.P.O, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2026:KER:11068
W.P.(C) No.26938/2025
:2:
5 MANO THOMAS
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O. M.T. THOMAS, ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN, RESIDING AT MUNDACKAL HOUSE,
KAIPUZHA.P.O, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 682031
6 MANOJ KUMAR J.
AGED 52 YEARS
ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN, RESIDING AT MANOJ BHAVAN,
PULIMATH.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 682031
7 RAMADEVI K.
AGED 52 YEARS
D/O.KANDAMUTHAN V., ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN, RESIDING AT CHENGARACHAM PALAYAM,
NATTUKAL.P.O, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD, PIN - 682031
8 JENSON P.J.,
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.JOY.P.P, ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN, RESIDING AT PANAKKAL HOUSE, SRAP-50,
ST.JOHN THE BAPTIST CHURCH ROAD, PALLINADA,
PALARIVATTOM.P.O, COCHIN, PIN - 682031
9 JASMI MOL K.A.,
AGED 48 YEARS
D/O.ABDUL KARIM, ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN, RESIDING AT KUNNATH HOUSE,
KURVAMOOZHY P.O., ALAMPARAPPU,
ERUMELY SOUTH, KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 682031
10 OUSEPH T.K.
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O.KURIAKOSE.T.T, ESCORT ATTENDANT,
2026:KER:11068
W.P.(C) No.26938/2025
:3:
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN, RESIDING AT THAIKKADAN HOUSE,
PARLIKAD P.O., WADAKKANCHERRY,
THRISSUR, PIN - 682031
11 GHEEVARGHESE M BABU
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.M.C.BABU, ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN, C/O.M.C.BABU, 31/1342,
MADUMBAL HOUSE,
MOTHER TERESA LANE, VADUTHALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
12 RENJITH R.
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.N.S,
ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, COCHIN,
RESIDING AT RENJITH NIVAS,
MANJOOR.P.O, MANJOOR,
KOTTAYAM, PIN - 682031
13 VINIESH K.V.
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O.K.N.VIJAYAN,
ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, COCHIN,
RESIDING AT KANNAMBILLIL HOUSE,
IRIMBANAM.P.O,
THRIPUNITHURA, PIN - 682031
14 DHANESH A.S.
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O.V.S.SASIDHARAN NAIR,
ESCORT ATTENDANT,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN,
RESIDING AT ANNAYIL HOUSE,VELLOR P.O.,
PAMPADY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 682031
2026:KER:11068
W.P.(C) No.26938/2025
:4:
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI
SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN
SRI.SACHIN RAMESH
SMT.AISHWARYA SATHEESAN
SMT.POOJA K.
SRI.MANIKANTAN S.KANDATHIL
SMT.SREELAKSHMI S.N.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
2 THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
KOCHI, PIN - 682031
BY ADV.
SRI.P.C. SASIDHARAN, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 30.10.2025 AND THE COURT ON 10.02.2026 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:11068
W.P.(C) No.26938/2025
:5:
N. NAGARESH, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No.26938 of 2025
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 10th day of February, 2026
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~
Petitioners - Escort Attendants working in the
High Court of Kerala seek to direct the respondents to rectify
the junior-senior anomaly and fix the pay of the petitioners in
tune with the pay fixed in respect of their juniors and grant all
consequential benefits to them.
2. The petitioners state that they were appointed
as Peons in the High Court service during the year 2007-2009.
They were granted First Time Bound Higher Grade on
completion of eight years service. The High Court
2026:KER:11068
incorporated the post of Escort Attendant in the Kerala High
Court Service Rules, 2007 as category 4(a) under Division IV.
3. Appointment to the post of Escort Attendants
was to be made by transfer from suitable and willing members
in the categories of Court Keeper (HG), Court Keeper, Office
Attendant (HG) and Office Attendant, based on seniority, as
per Ext.P5 Office Memorandum dated 26.11.2020. The posts
of Escort Attendants were created covering 47 posts of Office
Attendants. Petitioners 1 to 8 and 10 were appointed as
Escort Attendants by transfer, as per Ext.P9 order dated
30.07.2021.
4. The petitioners had received First Time
Bound Higher Grade on completion of eight years service.
Higher Grades have to be given on completion of 8/15/22
years of service. The petitioners state that they are entitled to
second Higher Grade on completing 15 years of total service.
However, their representations for Higher Grade were rejected
2026:KER:11068
by the Registrar General of the High Court of Kerala as per
Ext.P13 order dated 07.01.2025.
5. According to the petitioners, due to the
rejection of their request as per Ext.P13, many juniors to the
petitioners are drawing higher scale than that of the petitioners.
Smt.Rani K.K. and Nishitha K.M., who were juniors to the
petitioners in the cadre of Peon, thus draw higher pay for the
reason that the petitioners got appointment by transfer as
Escort Attendants.
6. The petitioners therefore submitted Ext.P17
representation dated 13.02.2025 seeking to rectify the junior-
senior anomaly. The 2nd respondent again rejected their
request as per Ext.P18 Office Memorandum dated 18.06.2025.
The petitioners state that Ext.P18 is illegal and arbitrary and
cannot be sustained in the light of the judgments of this Court
in W.P.(C) No.32933/2014, W.A. No.488/2017 and similar
cases.
2026:KER:11068
7. The petitioners therefore seek to quash
Exts.P13 and P18 and to direct the respondents to rectify the
junior-senior anomaly and fix the pay of the petitioners in tune
with the pay fixed in respect of their juniors and grant all
consequential benefits to them.
8. The respondents opposed the writ petition.
The respondents stated that the petitioners were originally
appointed as Office Attendants in the scale of pay of ₹23,000-
50,200. They were granted First Higher Grade on completion
of eight years in the scale of ₹23,700-52,600. Their pay was
fixed in terms of Rule 28A Part I KSR on their appointment as
Escort Attendants.
9. Time Bound Higher Grades are given as per
the Scheme provided in the 11th Pay Revision Order. As per
the Scheme, employees who remain in their entry post in the
scales of pay ranging from ₹23,000-50,200 to ₹85,000-
1,43,600 will be given Higher Grades on completion of
2026:KER:11068
specified periods of service as mentioned below:
(1) The first TBHG on completion of eight years
of service in the entry post.
(2) The second TBHG on completion of fifteen
years of service in the entry post and the regular promotion
post / Time Bound Higher Grade taken together.
(3) The third TBHG on completion of 22 years of
total service in the entry post and regular promotion post(s) /
Time Bound Higher Grade(s) taken together.
(4) The fourth TBHG on completion of 27 years
of total service in the entry post and regular promotion post(s) /
Time Bound Higher Grade(s) taken together.
10. The 2nd respondent pointed out that as per
Clause 16 of Appendix III of the Pay Revision Order, the term
"entry post" shall be defined as the post to which an employee
is initially appointed in Government service by direct
recruitment by the competent authority. Appointments made
2026:KER:11068
(by-transfer) from other categories will also be treated as
equivalent to direct recruitment for allowing the benefit of Time
Bound Higher Grade.
11. Therefore, in cases of appointment by-
transfer, TBHG promotions will be granted based on the new
entry post only. The Last Grade Service therefore cannot be
counted for granting Second Time Bound Higher Grade. The
petitioners were appointed as Escort Attendants "by-transfer".
The petitioners can claim Higher Grade only on completion of
eight years service in the post of Escort Attendant.
12. As regards junior-senior anomaly, the 2nd
respondent submitted that a junior appointed as Escort
Attendant after the approval of Second Time Bound Higher
Grade in the lowest post of Office Attendant may draw a higher
salary. But, the petitioners cannot raise such a claim since the
petitioners got appointment as Escort Attendants through "by-
transfer" method. The writ petition is therefore without any
2026:KER:11068
merit and it is to be dismissed, contended the respondents.
13. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
respondents.
14. The petitioners were appointed as Peons /
Office Attendants and were later appointed as Escort
Attendants by transfer. They were granted First TBHG after
rendering eight years service in the cadre of Peon. After
seven years, when they claimed the Second Time Bound
Higher Grade, the claim stands declined on the ground that in
the meanwhile they were appointed as Escort Attendants "by-
transfer".
15. Ext.P13 is the first communication by which
the request stands rejected. In Ext.P13, it has been stated that
as per paragraph 16 of G.O. No.33/2021/Home dated
26.03.2021, an appointment by transfer has to be treated as
direct recruitment. Therefore, the residency period for grant of
2026:KER:11068
Higher Grade has to be satisfied in the posts to which the
petitioners are appointed by transfer.
16. Declining to the request of the petitioners for
Second Higher Grade on completion of 15 years of service is
based on the definition of the term "entry cadre". As per G.O.
dated 26.03.2021, appointments under by-transfer method
should be treated as entry cadre. Fact remains that due to the
said definition in an executive order, employees who are much
juniors to the petitioner are drawing higher pay scale as the
juniors get the Second Higher Grade on completion of 15
years of service in the posts Peon / Office Attendant.
17. When juniors get higher salary, which is not
attributable to any special consideration or increments granted
to individual employees, then such a situation should be
treated as junior-senior anomaly. The petitioners' request to
consider their case as junior-senior anomaly also stands
rejected as per Ext.P18.
2026:KER:11068
18. As per Rule 28A Part I KSR, stepping up of
pay of seniors are permitted where a junior draws higher pay
on conditions.
(a) Both the junior and senior officers should
belong to the same cadre and the post in which they have
been promoted or confirmed, as the case may be, should be
identical and in the same cadre.
(b) The scale of pay of the lower post in which
they would have been drawn their pay but for their promotion
or confirmation should be identical.
(c) The anomaly should be directly as a result of
Rule 28A.
19. The respondents submit that the anomaly in
pay did not arise out of fixation of pay under Rule 28A Part I
KSR or Pay Revision. Therefore, the petitioners are not
entitled to higher salary based on the principles of junior-senior
anomaly. But, the fact remains that the petitioners are seniors
2026:KER:11068
and they are drawing lesser salary than some of their juniors.
The issue is whether a by-transfer appointment can be treated
as direct recruitment in the facts of the case. When selection
is made from open market or from an open but confined zone
of consideration based on qualification prescribed for the post
alone, it can be treated as direct recruitment. But, when by-
transfer appointment is from a limited number of existing
categories of employees under the establishment, it cannot be
treated as direct recruitment, so as to force the employees to
abandon the benefits of previous service rendered by them in
the establishment.
20. This Court, in Ext.P19 judgment in W.P.(C)
No.32933/2014, held that petitioners therein being senior
hands and who are equally qualified as their juniors, who draw
a higher pay, clearly cannot be denied the benefit of stepping
up of pay at par with their juniors. The fact that such situation
of seniors drawing lesser pay is not as a consequence of pay
2026:KER:11068
fixation under Rule 28A Part I KSR need not be a reason to
decline rectification of junior-senior anomaly.
21. Ext.P19 judgment in W.P.(C) No.32933/2014
was taken up in appeal by the State, filing W.A. No.488/2017.
The writ appeal was dismissed by a Division Bench of this
Court as per Ext.P21 judgment. Similar views were taken by
this Court in Exts.P21 to P23 judgments also. A Division
Bench of this Court in the judgment in Kamala Devi v. Kerala
State Financial Enterprises Limited [2002 (1) KLT 157] has
held that where junior is given higher pay than senior, the
classification suffer from vice of under inclusiveness and it has
to be understood as a case of plain discrimination.
22. The fact remains that the petitioners were
appointed as Peons / Office Attendants and they were placed
in the post of Escort Attendant through by-transfer method of
appointment. Both the posts are under the Kerala High Court
service. "By-transfer" is a permissible method for appointment
2026:KER:11068
to various posts in the Kerala High Court service, including in
the posts of Office Attendants. By-transfer appointment is also
a mode of appointment like promotion. It would be highly
illogical and arbitrary to treat appointment by transfer as a
fresh recruitment and to treat the posts to which regular
employees are appointed through by-transfer method as entry
cadre, in order to decline monetary benefits.
23. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I
am of the firm view that the grievance of the petitioners need
reconsideration. Exts.P13 and P18 orders are therefore set
aside. The respondents are directed to reconsider the issue
raised by the petitioners as an instance of junior-senior
anomaly and pass appropriate orders afresh expeditiously.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/06.02.2026
2026:KER:11068
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 26938 OF 2025
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.A3-3657/2006(1)
DATED 7-8-2006 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.A3-2817/2007(1)
DATED 23-1-2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.A3-2817/2007(1)
DATED 7-2-2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.A3-2817/2007(2)
DATED 11-6-2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
NO.A3-43125/2020 DATED 26-11-2020
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF GO(MS)NO.120/2020/HOME
DATED 29-5-2020 ISSUED BY THE
ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, HOME
DEPARTMENT.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF GO(MS)NO.56/2021/ HOME
DATED 19-2-2021 ISSUED BY THE
ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, HOME
DEPARTMENT
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO.A3-
43125/2020 DATED 10-2-2021 ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.A3-43125/2020
DATED 30-7-2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED
BY 1ST PETITIONER DATED 1-11-2024
2026:KER:11068
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED
BY 2ND PETITIONER DATED 1-11-2024
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 4-12-
2024 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
NO.HCKL/5196/2024-A3-HC KERALA DATED 7-
1-2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE PAY SLIP OF
SMT.RANI.K.K FOR THE MONTH OF DECEMBER
Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE PAY SLIP OF
SMT.RANK.K.K FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY
2025.
Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF THE PAY SLIP OF THE 9TH
PETITIONER FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY
2025.
Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
13-2-2025 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P18 TRUE COPY OF OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
NO.HCKL/2273/2025-A3-HC-KERALA DATED
18-6-2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P19 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN WP(C)NO.32933/14 DATED 28-10-
2016.
Exhibit P20 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 6-6-2017 OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.A.NO.488/17.
Exhibit P21 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 21-1-2019
OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
WP(C)NO.33827/17.
Exhibit P22 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 19-5-2020
OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
Exhibit P23 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 18-9-2020
OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
2026:KER:11068
Exhibit P24 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 17-3-2022
OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R(a) TRUE COPY OF THE THE GOVERNMENT AS PER
LETTER NO.C2/219/2019/HOME DATED
07.10.2020
