Sunday, November 20, 2011

OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE LIST

From

The General Secretary

KWA Engineering Staff Association

KWA Quarter No. MK 3/II/B

XII/611, Santo Gopalan Road

Koovappadam, Kochi 682 002.

To

Sri. Ashok Kumar Singh IAS

The Managing Director

JALA BHAVAN,

Kerala Water Authority,

Thiruvananthapuram.

Sir,

Sub: KWA– Estt. – Provisional Seniority list of the Executive Engineer

as on 01.10.2011. Objections- reg.

Ref: 1) KWA/JB/E2(A)/11535/2005 dated 14.10.2011

2) Judgments in OP No. 927 of 1995

3) GO (Rt) No. 471/86/PW & ST dated 14.03.1985

I may submit the following for favourable orders.

The seniority list prepared vide ref 1st cited above is incomplete and not in accordance with the directions contained and Rules. The ratio among the Direct recruitment and promotion in the post of Assistant Engineer is 6:4 (6 Graduate by Direct recruitment and 4 Diploma and Certificate by promotions). The Kerala Water Authority had made Special Recruitment in the post of Assistant Engineer in the absence of Degree holders from SC/ST candidates Diploma holders. As per the Rules for Special Recruitment to the post of Assistant Engineers, the Diploma holders appointed under the Special Recruitment Scheme have to be kept outside the normal strength of Assistant Engineers for the purpose of applying ratio 6:3:1 among Graduates, Diploma and Certificate holders. The Secretary to Government vide his letter No. 2686/B2/95/PWST dated 14.09.1995 has directed to exclude the Special Recruited Diploma holders Assistant Engineers from the cadre strength of Assistant Engineers and quota fixed for Diploma holders for maintaining ratio 6:3:1 for appointment and promotion among Degree, Diploma and certificate holders and to make good the resulting deficiency under Diploma quota by promoting the eligible hand from the feeder category. But the same has not been seen obeyed sofar. The Diploma holders appointed under the Special Recruitment Scheme have been included in the quota fixed for Diploma holders in the post of Assistant Engineer, Assistant Executive Engineer and Executive Engineer and denied the eligible promotions.

Eg:- Cadre strength of the Executive Engineer is 77 Nos.

As per Special Rules, 5% of the Cadre strength has been earmarked for Diploma holders. ie. 3.85, Say 4 Nos.

But no Diploma holders are existing in the post of Executive Engineer except 3 Special recruitees. (ie. 22. Aravindakshan. P.S, 23. Praveen kumar. V.M, 26. Vinayan P.K.) Hence urgent steps has to be taken to promote 4 Diploma holders from the Assistant Executive Engineer with retrospective effect from 30.01.1971 ie. date of amendment to Special Rules.

In view of the facts mentioned above and compliance with the directions of the Hon’ble High Court, I request your goodself to issue necessary orders for the following:

To avoid the following names from Diploma quota who were initially appointed as Assistant Engineers under the Special Recruitment Scheme and to fill up the deficiency of Diploma holders in the category of Executive Engineer by promoting 4 Diploma holders from the Assistant Executive Engineer with retrospective effect from 30.01.1971 ie. date of amendment to Special Rules.

22. Aravindakshan. P.S

23. Praveen kumar. V.M

26. Vinayan P.K.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully

Ernakulam Sd/-

14.11.2011 SALIH. K.K.

General Secretary

Friday, November 11, 2011

IRREGULAR ACTIONS

The incumbents appointed in the Kerala Water Authority through Employment Exchange and joined duty during the period from 1979 to 05.08.1986 and continued in service without termination was regularized with effect from 19.09.1990 based on the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Please see the Judgment dated 9th day of February 2011 in WP (c) No. 30557 of 2007 of the Hon’ble High Court.

In the above judgment, it was made clear that:-

“A counter affidavit is stated to have been filed by the respondent, which does not find a place in the records of this case, although a reply affidavit filed by the petitioner is in the file. A copy of the counter affidavit has been made available to me by the council for the petitioner which seeks to justify the action of the respondent on the same grounds as in the impugned order, Ext. P13. When the matter was taken up for hearing today none appears for the Water Authority. Therefore, I was constrained to hear and dispose of this writ petition on the basis of the arguments of the learned council for the petitioner and the records available.”

“Ext. P13 is clearly in violation of Ext. P1 judgment. In fact it amounts to contempt of court. Accordingly Ext. P13 is quashed and the writ petition is allowed as prayed for. I was inclined to direct the respondent to pay costs also. But taking a lenient view, I refrain from ordering costs.”

Now we can see the Order based on the above judgment below:-

PROCEEDINGS OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

Sub:- KWA- Estt- Sanctioning of the Maternity leave and regularization of service in respect of Smt. Ammini Amma, Assistant Engineer in compliance with the Hon’ble High Court Judgment dated 09.2.2011 on WP (C) No. 30557/07 Orders issued.

KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No. KWA/JB/E4/14057/01 Thiruvananthapuram Dated 01.08.2011

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read 1. Judgment dated 09.02.2011 in WP (c) No. 30557/07

2. Decision taken at 344th Board Meeting of KWA on 21.07.2011

ORDER

Smt. Ammini Amma , Assistant Engineer was appointed as Draftsman Gr.II in Kerala Water Authority through employment exchange, Kollam and joined duty on the FN of 07.05.1986. She continued in service till 10.12.1989 after one day service break on completion of every 179 days. The incumbent had applied maternity leave for 90 days with effect from 10.12.1989. But she was terminated from service with effect from 11.12.1989 while PSC hand reported for duty. Based on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court in WA No.1186/95 (B) dated 09.08.1996, Smt. Ammini Amma was re instated in service and joined duty on the FN of the 14.01.1997

In the judgment dated 09.02.2011 on WP (C) No. 30557/07 of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala it has directed authority to give her all service benefits as if the incumbent regularly appointed on 07.05.1986. Therefore the incumbent is entitled to the leave salary for the period of maternity leave she applied, increments promotion when due considering the service from 07.05.1986 and all other service benefits. Authority board directed Managing Director to comply the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court on its 344th board meeting of Kerala Water Authority held on21.07.2011 resolution No. 8826.

In these circumstances the service of Smt. Ammini Amma is here by regularized with effect from 07.05.1986 and sanction is accorded to disburse the Maternity Leave salary for 90 days with effect from 10.12.1989. The incumbent would have continued officiate in service but as per proceedings on leave for that period. The disbursing officer ie. Asst. Executive Engineer, PH Sub Division, Kollam is hereby directed to disburse the leave salary amount on 02.08.2011 itself. Any other service benefits in connection with the seniority and promotion will be sanctioned after finalizing the seniority list of Draftsman Gr.II, Draftsman Gr. I, Assistant Engineer in connection with the OP No. 879/02 and WP (C) No. 33514/01 related with the seniority list of the Draftsman Gr. I quashed by the judgment by Hon’ble High court vide judgment dated 28.11.2008.

This order is applicable only for Smt. Ammini Amma in light of the Hon’ble judgment dated 09.02.2011 in WP (C) No. 30557/ 07. No other persons shall be benefited by this order. The order of the Hon’ble High Court is here by complied.

Sd/-

MANAGING DIRECTOR


Complied the latest Judgment dated 9th February 2011 as above.

It is not understand that What is the obstruction for the non compliance of the judgment dated 15.09.2009 in WP (c ) No. 13966/2009 (Over 2 years) & Judgment dated 26.11.2008 in OP No. 879/2002 & 33514/2001.( Nearing 3 years)

Friday, October 14, 2011

DENIAL OF JUSTICE TO DIPLOMA HOLDERS

From

The General Secretary

KWA Engineering Staff Association

KWA Quarter No. MK 3/II/B

XII/611, Santo Gopalan Road

Koovappadam, Kochi 682 002.

To

Sri. Ashok Kumar Singh IAS

The Managing Director

JALA BHAVAN,

Kerala Water Authority,

Thiruvananthapuram.

Sir,

Sub: KWA– DPC - Deficiency of Diploma holders in the post of

Assistant Engineer, Assistant Executive Engineer & Executive

Engineer- reg.

Ref: 1) Judgments in WP© No. 13966 of 2009(M)&OP No. 879 of 2000(D)

2) Judgments in OP No. 927 of 1995

3) GO (Rt) No. 471/86/PW & ST dated 14.03.1985

I may submit the following for favourable orders.

In the matter of promotion, the KWA had denied rights and opportunities of feeder categories of the Assistant Engineer. The Kerala Water Authority had made excess direct recruitment in the post of Assistant Engineer and its feeder categories without observing the cadre strength ratio as per Special Rules. In the absence of Degree holders from SC/ST candidates the KWA had also made Special Recruitment from Diploma holders in the post of the Assistant Engineer. As per the Rules for Special Recruitment to the post of Assistant Engineers, the Diploma holders appointed under the Special Recruitment Scheme have to be kept outside the normal strength of Assistant Engineers for the purpose of applying ratio 6:3:1 among Graduates, Diploma and Certificate holders. The Secretary to Government vide his letter No. 2686/B2/95/PWST dated 14.09.1995 has directed to exclude the Special Recruited Diploma holders Assistant Engineers from the cadre strength of Assistant Engineers and quota fixed for Diploma holders for maintaining ratio 6:3:1 for appointment and promotion among Degree, Diploma and certificate holders and to make good the resulting deficiency under Diploma quota by promoting the eligible hand from the feeder category. But the same has not been seen obeyed sofar. The Diploma holders appointed under the Special Recruitment Scheme have been included in the quota fixed for Diploma holders in the post of Assistant Engineer, Assistant Executive Engineer and Executive Engineer and denied the eligible promotions.

Eg:- Cadre strength of the Executive Engineer is 77 Nos.

As per Special Rules, 5% of the Cadre strength has been earmarked for Diploma holders. ie. 3.85, Say 4 Nos.

But no Diploma holders are existing in the post of Executive Engineer except 2 Special recruitees. Hence urgent step has to be taken to promote 4 Diploma holders from the Assistant Executive Engineer with retrospective effect from 30.01.1971 ie. date of amendment to Special Rules.

The Hon’ble High Court in it’s judgment dated 26.11.08 in OP No. 879/2002 D has quashed seniority list of Draftsman Gr. I and promotions made from this list to the Assistant Engineers and directed the KWA to prepare a seniority list of Draftsman Gr. I following the principles applicable strictly maintaining the ratio of 7 : 3 among the promotees and direct recruits with retrospective effect from 01.04.1968. Based on this judgment, promotions effected to the Assistant Engineers are to be revised or reviewed.

In order to settle the issue, the direct recruitment in the post of Assistant Engineer may be stopped until the deficiencies of the promotees are made good.

In view of the facts mentioned above and compliance with the directions of the Hon’ble High Court, I request your goodself to issue necessary orders for the following:

1)To stop the direct recruitment in the post of the Assistant Engineer until the cadre strength ratio is maintained with retrospective effect.

2)To avoid the names of the Assistant Engineers appointed under the Special Recruitment Scheme from the list of Diploma holders and to fill up the deficiency of Diploma holders in the category of Assistant Engineer, Assistant Executive Engineer & Executive Engineer in accordance with the provisions in the Special Rules.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully

Ernakulam Sd/-

26.09.2011 SALIH. K.K.

General Secretary

Saturday, July 16, 2011

CORRUPTION - APPOINTMENTS AGAINST THE COURT ORDERS

As per Court Orders need not be advised until further orders but the KWA has advised and appointed stating that the appointments are as per the directions of the Court in WP( c ) 18865/06U. Please see the Court directions below:-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Present

The Honourable Mr. Justice K.K. Dinesan

On Tuesday the 18th day of July 2006/27th Adhadha 1926

WP ( C ) 18865/06 U

Petitioners :

1. Adarsh T.K

Aged 31 years, S/o. Krishnan Nair, Thriveni

SRPM (PO),Karunagappally, Kollam 690 539

2. J. Ajithkumar, aged 37 years, S/o. Sri. Late K.N. Janardhanan pillai,

Ajith Nivas , Malayalam Nagar 55 ,Chandanathoppe (PO), Kollam 691 014

Respondents:

1. Kerala Public Service Commission rep. by its Secretary

Pattom,Thiruvananthapuram.

2. Kerala Water Authority rep. by its Managing Director,

Jalabhavan, Vellayambalam , Thiruvananthapuram.

3. Chief Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, do-

Writ petitions praying inter alia that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP (C) the High Court be pleased to issue an interim direction to respondents 2 & 3 to forthwith and at any rate before the expiry of the validity of Ext.P1 rank list, report strength 76 names as vacancies in the prescribed proforma for advice and appointment from Ext.P1 rank lists pending consideration and disposal of the above WP.

This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support of WP( C ) and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.B. Gopakumar, Advocate for the petitioner the court passed the following.

ORDER

Urgent Notice.

Having regard to the averments made in the writ petition, there shall be an interim order directing the 3rd respondent to report the vacancies of Draftsman Gr.I/Water Works Inspector Gr. I/Overseer Gr.I /Drainage Inspector to the 1st respondent PSC so as to reach the office of the 1st respondent before 5pm. on 21.7.2006 . This interim order shall be implemented even if the reportable number of vacancies is nil or less than 76. In order to safeguard the interest of respondents 2 and 3, there shall be a further direction that again at vacancies reported as per this order , the candidates need not be advised until further orders.

18.7.06 sd/ K.K. Denessan, Judge

/true copy/ sd/ Assistant Registrar

OUR ONE OF THE GAIN

KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
No. KWA/JB/E1-14060/99 JALA BHAVAN
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033
KERALA - INDIA
Dated : 29-9-1999
From
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
To
Shri. Salih. KK
General Secretary
Sir,
Sub:- Anomaly in the scale of pay of Overseer Gr. III- reg.
Ref:- 1. Judgment dated 9.7.99 of the Hon'ble High Court in OP No. 7974 of 95Y filed by your Association
2. Your letter No. OA 1/97 dated 19.8.99 addressed to the Managing Director, KWA
Referring to the above I am to inform you that the scale of pay of Overseer Gr.III have been enhanced to that of Operator w.e.f 1-3-97 vide GO (P) 54/99/Ird dated 19-8-97.
Yours faithfully
Sd/-
MANAGING DIRECTOR

PROPOSED SCALE OF PAY BY OUR ASSOCIATION

Proposed Scale of Pay by KWA Engineering Staff Association Vs Existing

Sl.No.

Designation

Pay Revision 1997

Pay Revision 2004

Proposed by Engineering Staff Association

20

Asst.Exe. Engineer

7710 – 12110

12580 – 21780

22580 – 40750

23

Administrative Assistant

7510 – 11785

12580 – 21780

22010 - 39750

24

Accounts Office Gr. II

7510 – 11785

12580 – 21780

22010 - 39750

25

Law Officer Gr.II

7510 – 11785

12580 - 21780

22010 - 39750

31

Asst. Engineer

6935 – 11460

11410 – 20680

21440 - 38840

33

Divisional Accountant

6760 - 11135

11070 - 18680

19440 - 34430

46

Head Clerk

4710 – 7710

8610 – 13480

15040 - 31210

55

Draftsman Gr. I

4710 – 7710

8170 – 13030

16240 – 32750

64

UD Clerk

6690 - 11070

13560 - 29670

68

Draftsman Gr. II

3770 – 5785

6690 – 11070

15040 – 31210

69

Head Fitter

3770 – 5785

6690 – 11070

14280 - 30440

78

Overseer Gr. III

3440 - 5385

5740 - 9610

11610 - 27570

80

LD Clerk

3205 - 5135

5300 - 9110

10470 - 26870

Ernakulam

11.04.2011 SALIH. K.K.

General Secretary

Saturday, February 19, 2011

DISCRIMINATION AGAIN

From
The General Secretary
KWA Engineering Staff Association
KWA Quarter No. MK 3/II/B
XII/611, Santo Gopalan Road
Koovappadam, Kochi 682 002.
To
Dr. V.K. Baby IAS
The Managing Director,
Jala Bhavan, KWA,
Thiruvananthapuram.
Sir,
Sub: Rearrangement of the post of Draftsman Gr.I and Gr. II. Denial of
Interchangeability - reg.
Ref:1)No.KWA/JB/E4 (B)/508/2011 dated 28.01.2011 of the MD,KWA, Tvm.
2)GO(P) No. 1/91/P & ARD Tvm. Dated 07.01.1991
3) No. 2600/B3/99/IRD dated 13.04.99 of the Secretary to Govt.

Referring to the above, I may submit the following for favorable orders:
In the GO read 2nd cited above, it was ordered that employees holding the posts which have more than one grade will be transferred and posted against vacancies without taking into account the grade to which they belong provided nature of work in different grades is one and the same. It was to adopt a uniform system in the matter of transfers and postings in the case of employees holding such posts which have more than one grade and nature of work in the different grades is the same.
The duties performed by the Draftsman Gr.I and Draftsman Gr.II in the KWA are same. The Secretary to Government, Irrigation (WSB)Department vide ref. 3rd cited above has informed the KWA that, procedure followed in the postings of LD Clerks and UD Clerks can be extended in the case of postings of Draftsman Gr.I and Draftsman Gr.II also.
The restructuring process in the KWA is going on. The proposal to create the Sub section and provide the post of Draftsman Gr.I /Sub Engineer in the Section office as the immediate subordinate of the Assistant Engineer is under discussion. Hence experiences in the Section Offices are essential to the post of Draftsman Gr.I since it is the immediate feeder category of the Asst. Engineer. The proposals are to be based on the work load of each Office and to achieve better results to improve the functioning of the KWA.
The existing nature of duties of Draftsman Gr.I and Draftsman Gr.II are not distinct one.
The hurried actions vide ref 1st cited above is to deny the permitted interchangeability without adopting the distinct nature of duties, proper requirements, uniform system and discussions with the trade unions.
Hence I request that necessary orders may please be issued to keep obeyance of the ref 1st cited above and discussion conducted with the trade unions in the matter at the earliest.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully

Ernakulam
14.02.2011 SALIH. K.K.
General Secretary

Thursday, January 20, 2011

PAY REVISION DEMANDS

From
The General Secretary
KWA Engineering Staff Association,
KWA Quarter No. MK 3/II/B
XII/611, Santo Gopalan Road
Koovappadam, Kochi 682 002.
To
Justice R. Rajendra Babu
The Chairman
Pay Revision Commission
Legislature Complex
Vikas Bhavan PO, Trivandurm 695 033.
Sir,
Sub: KWA – Revision of Pay scales of the employees of the KWA & Anomalies
in the Pay Revision Orders 2004 –-reg

Ref:1) GO(MS) No.681/2010/Fin. dated 14.12.2010.
2) GO(P) No.46/2007/WRD dated 30.07.2007.
3) No.6825/C2/2001/IrD Tvm. dated 18.8.01 of the Secretary to Govt
4) Judgment in OP No.22409/2001 & OP No.5741/2001.

Referring to the above I may submit the following for favorable considerations:-
The Pay Revision Committee 2004 has not considered the promotional avenues, time bound higher grade benefits and anomalies in the previous pay revisions in the case of Overseer Gr. III, Draftsman Gr. II and Draftsman Gr. I
The post of Overseer Gr. III was created vide GO (P) No. 222/81/LA & SWD dated 08.12.1981. As per this statutory provision, the ratio among promotees and direct recruits in the post of Draftsman Gr. II is 1:1. This cadre strength ratio for promotion from Overseer Gr. III had not been implemented. The first promotion was made from the post of Overseer Gr. III only on 22.10.1998. From the past experience, it is clear that the 1st batch of Overseer Gr. III was promoted to the post of Draftsman Gr. II then to Draftsman Gr. I in the lower scales without any benefits after stagnated for more than16 years in the initial post when lower posts acquired higher scales by promotions and time bound higher grade. All of them have acquired 3rd time bound higher grade scale before 2nd promotion in the lower scale. The KWA was made excess recruitment in the promotion posts of Overseer Gr. III against the Special rules and court orders.
Considering the stagnation and no benefits sofar, Draftsman Gr. I promoted from Overseer Gr. III may be allowed Special Pay and non cadre promotion as Assistant Engineer in the range of scale of pay of Rs. 22360 – 35320 since all of them have acquired 3rd time bound higher grade scale by service.
Time Bound Higher Grade.
As per the special rules, certificate holder is eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer. Diploma holder is eligible for promotion up to the Exe. Engineer. Minimum period of 2 years qualifying service in the case of certificate holders in the immediate subordinate post of Draftsman Gr. I is restricted for promotions only. If applicable the promotions in time, there is no question of time bound higher grade scales. Please see the 10(viii) of the GO (P) No. 515/85 dated 16.09.1985(Pay Revision Orders 1983) wherein it clearly mentioned that the time bound higher grade scale is to be sanctioned for a category in the normal course will be the scale of pay of the next promotion post subject to the requirement of academic qualification for promotion to such promotion post. The Hon’ble High Court in it’s judgment in WP© No. 19688 of 2007(R) has directed the KWA to issue revised orders for sanctioning time bound higher grade promotion since it is not stipulated that only an Overseer Gr. I with 2 years service is entitled to get the higher grade in the scale of pay of the promotion post. Hence clearly mentioned order may be issued to allow the scale of pay of Asst. Engineer for the 3rd time bound higher grade from Overseer Gr. III and 2nd time bound higher grade from Draftsman Gr. II with effect from 01.07.2004 on the basis of the academic qualification.
The Secretary to Govt. vide ref. 3rd cited above has directed the Managing Director, Thiruvananthapuram to consider the following points during the next pay revision in compliance of the judgment in OP No.5741/2001:- (copy of the ref. 3rd cited above is appended herewith)
1) The scale of pay of the first and second promotion post of Overseer Gr III is less than that of 1st and 2nd promotion post of Operators, plumber, Meter Readers.
2) Fixation of pay when the seniors are drawing less pay than juniors.

The demands of our Association are as follows:-

1) To Equalize the scale of pay of Draftsman Gr. I/Sub Engineer to Junior Superintendent as in the pay revision1968.
2) To allow Higher scale to Draftsman Gr. I than Meter Inspector & Plumbing Inspector as in the previous pay revisions.
3) To allow Higher scale to Draftsman Gr. II than UD Clerk.
4) To allow Higher scale to Asst. Exe. Engineer than Administrative Assistant, Accounts Officer Gr. II & Law Officer Gr. II as in the previous pay revisions.
5) Considering the stagnation and no benefits sofar, Draftsman Gr. I promoted from Overseer Gr. III (1st batch of Overseer Gr. III )may be allowed Special Pay and non cadre promotion as Assistant Engineer in the range of scale of pay of Rs. 22360 – 35320 since all of them have
acquired 3rd time bound higher grade scale by service.
6) Higher grade scale of Rs. 9360 – 16180 implemented to the 20% of Draftsman Gr. I may be cancelled with effect from 01.07.2004 since it is not applicable and adversely affected the prevailing service benefits.
7) The scale of pay of the first and second promotion post of Overseer Gr. III is less than that of 1st and 2nd promotion post of Operators, Plumbers, Meter Readers etc. Hence raise the time bound higher grade scales with effect from 1.3.1992 in compliance of the judgment in OP No. 5741/2001. (See comparative statement)
8) Redesignate:- Draftsman Gr. I to Sub Engineer
Draftsman Gr. II to Draftsman
Overseer Gr.III to Overseer
9) Considering the promotional avenues and stagnation, 4th & 5th time bound higher grade scale may be allowed to the Overseer Gr. III on completion of 25 & 28 years of service respectively.
10) Reduce the residency period of time bound higher grade scales and reduction should be effective from 01.07.2004.
11) To allow non cadre promotion from the Assistant Engineer to the Asst. Exe. Engineer in the prescribed ratio among Graduates and Diploma holders as per Special Rules. If it is restricted to any one of the above, it will collapse the ratio and create problems among the staff.
12) Conduct income survey of the each category for 5, 10, 15 & 20 years to understand the previous benefits
13) Provide allowance to LA duty



Proposed range of Scale of Pay by KWA Engineering Staff Association

Asst.Exe. Engineer
22360 – 35320

Asst. Engineer
21240 - 34500

Draftsman Gr. I
16180 – 27140

Draftsman Gr. II
13900 – 22360


I request that anomalies of the pay revisions may please by rectified with effect from 01. 07.2004 before considering the proposed pay revision.

Thanking you,
Yours faithfully

Ernakulam
20.01.2011
SALIH. K.K.
General Secretary
Acc: 1) Comparative statement of Grade scales
2) Relavent page of GO(P) No. 515/85 dated 16.09.85
3)Judgments in WP© No.19688/2007 & 22409/2001
4) Copy of reference 3

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

NOT IMPLEMENTED

The seniority should be reckoned from the date of vacancy within the quota rule. Out of the total strength of 409, 205 is to be provided with promotees from Overseer Gr.III.
On the basis of the Rule 5, Note 3 of the General Rules in KS & SSR which is also applicable to the KWA, the ratio shall be worked out on the cadre strength. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision Prakash V Kurian reported in 1999 (2) KLT 710 (SC) held that Note 3 Rule 5 Part II KS & SSR applies to all Special Rules whenever a ratio or percentage is prescribed in the Rules. It has to be computed on the cadre strength of the post to which the recruitments is to be made and not on the basis of the vacancies existing at that time.