W.A. No. 1222 of 2017 in W.P.(C) 7146/2017 (and connected cases)

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI** **FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2018 / 4TH JYAISHTA, 1940** **WA.No. 1222 of 2017 IN WPC. 7146/2017** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 7146/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 08-03-2017** **APPELLANT(S)/2ND RESPONDENT** **THE KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, HEAD OFFICE, P.B.NO.130, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM-691001.** **BY ADV.SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC,** **RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 & 4:** **1. GOPINATHAN NAIR VYSAK, MCRA-107, MANAYIL KULANGARA, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM-691012.** **2. SASI KUMAR N.S. KANNANKARA NORTH, ALAYAMON P.O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM-691320.** **3. SHANMUKHAN PILLAI D.** - **MURUKALAYAM, KUREEPUZHA CHERY, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM-691003.** **4. RAGHUNATHAN CHETTIYAR C.** - **C.R.VILAS, KALAKKODE, POOTHAKKULAM P.O., KOLLAM-691302.** **5. RAVEENDRAN M.P.** - **SREE SADANAM, OLAI, KOLLAM-691009.** **6. M.K.SIVASANKARA PILLAI** - **MULLASSERIL HOUSE, PUTHUKKODU, CHAVARA, KOLLAM-690585.** **7. REGHU KUMAR B.** - **JAGATHY, SANKAR NAGAR-88, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM-691001.** **8. RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR B.** - **KARTHIKA, KOTHETHU NAGAR-56, KADAPPAKKADA P.O.,** **9. SULEKHA R.** - **MANAS, THATTAMALA P.O., KOLLAM.** **10. PRASANNA KUMARI P.P.** - **JAGATHY, SANKAR NAGAR-88, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM-691001.** **11. RAJADAS S.ABHAYAM** - **PULIPPARA P.O., KADAKKAL, KOLLAM-691536.** WA 1222/2017 2 **12. DANIEL G.** - **DAHLIA, AMBALATHUMKALA P.O., EZHUKONE, KOLLAM-691505.** **13. SUBRAMANIAN R.** - **SREEKRIPA, ERAM MIDDLE, CHATHANNOOR P.O., KOLLAM-691572.** **14. ASHRAF A. TRIPTHI** - **KANNIMEL 'C', KILIKOLLOOR P.O., KOLLAM-691004.** **15. THULASEEDHARAN D.** - **VRINDAVAN, VIKAS NAGAR-6, TKMC P.O., KOLLAM-691001.** **16. S.SASIDHARAN PILLAI** - **CHITHRALAYAM, PADANAYARKULANGARA-NORTH,** **17. RAJAMONI D.** - **MILAN, KOONAYIL, PARAVOOR P.O., KOLLAM.** **18. SUNANDA DEVI R.** - **KARUNYA, KARIKUZHY, MAYYANADU P.O., KOLLAM.** **19. PUSHPANGADAN PILLAI S. ATHIRA, KOTHETHU NAGAR-58, ULIYAKOVIL P.O, KOLLAM-691019.** **20. VIJAYAMMA R.** - **VIJAYA BHAVAN, TNRA-135, THIRUMULLAVARAM, KOLLAM-691012.** **21. REGHOOTHAMAN PILLAI K.P.** - **PUNTHALA KOCHUPUTHEN VEEDU, SOUTH MYNAGAPPALLY, MYNAGAPPALLY P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM.** **22. AJITH KUMAR S.** - **SUMANDIRAM, PEROOR, TKMC P.O., KOLLAM-691005.** **23. SUKUMARA PILLAI N.** - **SOPANAM, VALATHUNGAL P.O., KOLLAM-691018.** **24. SALOMA L. CHURCH VIEW, KANJIRACODE, KUNDARA P.O., KOLLAM-691501.** **25. RAJENDRAN V.** - **AJANTHA, PEZHUMTHURUTHU, PEROMON P.O., PERINADU,** **26. SALIM N.** - **SRUTHYEROOR P.O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM-691312.** **27. RADHA DEVI B.S. SABARMATHY, AYANIVELIKULANGARA NORTH, S.V.MARKET P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-691588.** **28. MURALEEDHARAN NAIR S. KAITHAPUZHATHU VEEDU, SREE BHADRA NAGAR-98, ULIYAKOVIL P.O., KOLLAM-691019.** **29. SASIKUMARAN NAIR S. KULATHINKARA VEEDU, VETTIKAVALA P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-691538.** WA 1222/2017 3 **30. NIRMALA AMMA T.** - **SOUPARNIKA, ADICHANALLOOR P.O., KOLLAM-691573.** **31. S.BAHULEYAN** - **BUNGLAVIL, KADAKKAVOOR, KADAKKAVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695306.** **32. SUGATHAN J.** - **VADAKKE KOLLIRAZHIKATHU VEEDU, PERUMPUZHA P.O.,** **33. SYAMALA KUMARI M.** - **SREEVALSOM, AYOOR P.O., AYOOR, KOLLAM-691533.** **34. BABY JOHN** - **MANNOOR, PLAPUZHA, HARIPPAD, ALAPUZHA-690514.** **35. SHAJAHAN J.** - **CHARUVILA VEEDU, MATHRA P.O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM-691333.** **36. ASOKAN B.NAIR** - **KODAMPALLIL HOUSE, NADUVILAKKARA, THEVALAKKARA P.O.,** **37. D.SOMAVALLY** - **T.V.SADANAM, AYIKUNNAM, SASTHAMCOTTA P.O., KOLLAM-690521.** **38. R.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI MEMANA, KUTTIKKAT LANE, NEAR RAILWAY STATION, CHIRAYINKEEZH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695304.** **39. GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR R.** - **NIRMALYAM, ADICHANALLOOR P.O., KOLLAM.** **40. RAVINDRAN NAIR K.** - **RAVEENDRA SADANAM, THEVANNOOR P.O., AYOOR,** **41. VIJAYA KUMAR V. PEROOR HOUSE, KADUVUNKAL, VALLIKUKNNAM P.O., ALLEPPEY-690501.** **42. KOCHUKUTTAN PILLAI R.** - **SOUPARNIKA, ARACKAL, EDAYAM P.O., VALAKOM, KOLLAM-691532.** **43. RAJENDRAN PILLAI A.B.** - **AKKILAZHIKATHU VEEDU, VARINJAM, KARAMCODE P.O.,** **44. RAVEENDRA KURUP R.** - **DHANYA, MANAKKARA, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM-690521.** **45. VIDYADHARAN PILLAI C.** - **VIDYA BHAVAN, THUDAYANNOOR P.O., KADAKKAL,** **46. RAJENDRAN K.** - **NJARALITHARA HOUSE, NJAKKANAL P.O., KRISHNAPURAM,** **47. KANAKALATHA PILLAI H.** WA 1222/2017 4 **ROHINI, PALACKAL, THEVALAKKARA P.O., KOLLAM.** **48. SASIDHARA PRASAD T.** - **VIKAS, KALLELIBHAGOM P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690519.** **49. KRISHNAN KUTTY K.** - **VISHAKAM, ANAYADI P.O., SOORANADU-NORTH, KOLLAM.** **50. T.RAMACHANDRAN** - **VILAYILAYYATH, PATHIRICKAL, PARAKKADAVU P.O, SOORANADU-NORTH, KOLLAM-690561.** **51. RAJAN NAIR V.** - **RAJA GIRI, FRONDS NAGAR-74, KANNIMEL CHERRY, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM.** **52. SALEENA T.S.** - **SREELEKSHMI, KALAYAM, KURIYODE, CHADAYAMANGALAM,** **53. BADARUDEEN KUTTY E.** - **CHANGAYIL, KIZHAKKATHIL NORTH, MYNAGAPPALLY P.O.,** **54. SREEKUMAR V.** - **GANESH VIHAR, PANMANA, PUTHENCHANTHA P.O., CHAVARA,** **55. SARALA T.** - **HARISREE, THEKKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM-691016.** **56. MANOHARLAL B.** - **ROHINI, S.V.NAGAR-93, PULIYATHUMUKKU AYATHIL,** **57. LATHA A.** - **AIKKARAKUDIYIL VEEDU, KURUMANDAL-PARAVOOR P.O.,** **58. PRIYAMVADA K.** - **LATHA BHAVANAM, NEDUNGOLAM P.O., PARAVOOR,** **59. JAYARAJA PANICKER B.** - **J.S.NIVAS, MOONNAM VADAKKETHIL, MYLAKKADU P.O., KOLLAM.** **60. VANAJAKSHY S.** - **THUNDI VEEDU, MATHRA P.O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM-691333.** **61. SURESH BABU K.** - **KICHU VIHAR, KULATHOOKONAM, CHIRAKKARA P.O., KALLUVATHUKKAL, KOLLAM-691578.** **62. SAJEEV B.** - **PAVITHRAM, VAZHAMUTTOM P.O., OMALLOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-689647.** **63. BASHEER M.** - **MARHABA, PALLITHOTTAM P.O., KOLLAM-691006.** **64. MOHANAN PILLAI V.K.** WA 1222/2017 5 **SWATHY, PUTHOOR, PUTHOOR P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-695107.** **65. ALXANDER GONSALVEZ G. FLAT NO.A-5, VAIDYA BHAVAN APARTMENTS, MANAYILKULANGARA, KOLLAM-691013.** **66. SUDHAKARAN B.B.** - **KOIPURATHU, AISWARYA, MUNDAKKAL EAST, KOLLAM-691001.** **67. VASANTHA KUMAR V.** - **VASANTHA NILAYAM, KANNAMKODE, VETTIKAVALA P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-691538.** **68. SASIKUMAR C.P.** - **ANJANAM, PERUMPUZHA P.O., KOLLAM-691504.** **69. CICILY K. SOUPARNIKA, P.K.NAGAR-07, VADAKKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM-691010.** **70. VIKRAMADITHYAN N.** - **PUNARTHAM, JANAYUGAM NAGAR-27, KADAPPAKADA P.O.,** **71. ANNAMMA K. KARUNYA, THRIKKANNAMANGAL, KOTTARAKKARA P.O., KOLLAM-691506.** **72. KUSUMKUMARY AMMA B.** - **KARIMAKULATHU VEEDU, KANJAVELI, P.O.KANJAVELI, KOLLAM.** **73. SUAHAMA P.S.** - **KARTHIKA, KARINGANNOOR, KARINGANNOOR P.O., KOLLAM-691516.** **74. RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI R.** - **PORNMI KOTTANKARA, CHANDANATHOPPE P.O., KOLLAM-691014.** **75. YOHANNAN M.** - **SAJU BHAVAN, THAZHAMEL, ANCHAL, KOLLAM.** **76. BALACHANDRAN PILLAI C.G. CHANGAVILAYIL VEEDU, RANDALUMMOODU, THALAVOOR P.O., KOLLAM-691508.** **77. UNNIRAJAN PILLAI M.** - **ANJANAM, PERUMON P.O., KOLLAM.** **78. CHANDRA BOSE K.** - **C.D.BHAVAN, RANDAMKUTTY, KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM-691004.** **79. SHANI G.** - **VALIYA KALAYIL, KADUVAKUZHY, CHEMMANTHOOR, PUNALUR** **80. SALAHUDEEN KUNJU M.** - **PUNNAVILAYIL, MULLAKKARY, PANMANA P.O., CHAVARA,** **81. KUTTAN PILLAI N.** - **VAYALIL KAROTTU PUTHEN VEEDU, KALAYAPURAM P.O.,** WA 1222/2017 6 **KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-691560.** ## **82. VIJAYARAJAN G.** **BHARGAVI SADANAM, BRIDGE P.O., CHAVARA, KOLLAM.** **83. RASHAKRISHNAN NAIR C.** - **LENIN BHAVAN, MANJAKALA, PALLIMUKKU,** **AVANEESWARAM R.S.P.O., KOLLAM-691508.** **84. ABDUL BASHEER T.** - **SHEBEER MANZIL, NEAR TKM SAW MILL, AVANOOR,** **85. THRIVIKRAMAN PILLAI T.** - **VIKAS, KOVOOR, ARINALLOOR P.O., KOLLAM.** **86. RAVEENDRAN P.K.** - **KARTHIKA, VALIYAPADAM, VALANTHARA P.O., WEST KALLADA,** **87. DAYANANDAN K.** - **KRISHNA BHAVAN, KARIMBALOOR, PUTHENKULAM P.O.,** **88. RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI K.C.** - **KRISHNAGIRI, KOTTAKKAKOM, PERINADU P.O., KOLLAM.** **89. SAHADEVAN UNNITHAN K.** - **VETTAHU VEEDU, EDAKKADU P.O, MALANADA, KOLLAM.** **90. PRASAD S.** - **MALERVADI, CHINNAKKADA NAGAR, KOLLAM-691001.** **91. VINAYA BABU N.** - **ANANDA BHAVAN, DARSANA NAGAR-97, PATTATHANAM P.O.,** ## **92. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR G.** - **CHANDRA BHAVANAM, PRAYAR SOUTH, ALUMPEEDIKA P.O., OACHIRA, KOLLAM-690547.** ## **93. OMANA AMMA P.** - **BINDU BHAVANAM, IVERKALA NORTH, PUTHANAMBALAM P.O.,** ## **94. SUGATHAN K.** - **ELANJIKKAL HOUSE, PADANAYAEKULANGARA NORTH, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690518.** ## **95. RAJAN R.** - **GEETHA VILASOM, AMBALAM MUKKU, ELAMADU P.O., AYOOR,** **96. GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI M.** - **KODAMPIL VEEDU, NADUVILAKKARA, THEVALAKKARA P.O.,** **97. SUSEELADEVI AMMA D.** **CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, CHADAYAMANGALAM P.O., KOLLAM.** WA 1222/2017 7 **98. REMANI BAI S. REVATHY, NENMENI EAST, MUNROTHURUTHU P.O., EAST KALLADA, KOLLAM.** **99. THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.** **100. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.** **R1 to R98 BY ADV. SHRI P.N.MOHANAN R99 AND 100 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI SUNILKUMAR KURIAKOSE** **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 2/3/2018 ALONG WITH WA 1247/2017 AND CONNECTED CASES,HE COURT ON 25/5/2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KAV/** ## **P.N.RAVINDRAN & R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JJ.** =-=-==-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ## **W.A.Nos.1222, 1231, 1247 & 1538 of 2017 & W.A.Nos.162, 163, 380 & 390 of 2018** =-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= **Dated this the 25[th] day of May, 2018** ## **JUDGMENT** ## _**P.N.Ravindran, J.**_ W.A.No.1222 of 2017 arises from the judgment delivered by the learned single Judge on 8.3.2017 in W.P.(C)No.7146 of 2017. The appellant is the second respondent therein. By the impugned judgment, the learned single Judge allowed W.P.(C)No.7146 of 2017 relying on Ext.P6 judgment in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 and directed the appellant to disburse to the writ petitioners, salary for the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 based on the pay revision effected as per Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Ext.P6 judgment in W.P. (C)No.34683 of 2009, delivered on 15.12.2016, is under challenge in W.A.No.1231 of 2017 filed by the second respondent therein. Relying on the judgment in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009, the learned single Judge allowed W.P.(C)No.11344 of 2017 and 11337 of 2017 by separate judgments delivered on 3.4.2017. The said judgments are under challenge in W.A.Nos.1247 and 1538 of 2017. Following the aforesaid judgments, another learned single Judge of this court allowed W.P. (C)No.26955 of 2017, 27455 of 2017, 20741 of 2017 and 22430 of 2017 by a common judgment delivered on 31.10.2017. The said ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:2:-** judgment is under challenge in W.A.No.162, 163, 380 and 390 of 2018. For the sake of convenience, W.A.No.1222 of 2017 is treated as the main case and unless otherwise mentioned, the documents referred to are those produced and marked in W.P.(C)No.7146 of 2017 from which the said writ appeal arises. In view of the fact that the issues arising in these writ appeals are one and the same, these appeals were heard together on 2.3.2018 and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The brief facts of the case are as follows: 2. The scales of pay and allowances of employees of District Cooperative Banks were revised with effect from 1.7.2002 by G.O. (M.S.)No.145/2005/Co-op. dated 21.6.2005. A copy thereof is on record as Ext.P2 in W.P.(C)No.7146 of 2017 from which W.A.No.1222 of 2017 arises. In paragraph 1 of the said Government order it was stipulated that pay and allowances of employees of District Cooperative Banks will be revised with effect from 1.7.2002. However in paragraph 9 it was stipulated as follows: ## “(9) പ�ബല�ത�യത�യ� ക�ല�വധ�യ�:- ഈ ഉതരവ�ന� 1.7.2002 മതൽ പ�ബല�മണ�യ�ര�ക�. എന�ൽ ഇത പക�രമള കട�ശ�ക 1.7.2003 മതൽ മ�തമമ ലഭ�യകയള. 1.7.2002 മതൽ അഞ വർഷതതത.� അടത ശമള പര�ഷരണ�വമരമയ� ഇത�ൽ ഏത�മണ� അവസ�ന� അതവമര ഈ ഉതരവ�ന� പ�ബല�മണ�യ�ര�ക�.” It was stipulated that though the pay revision takes effect from ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:3:-** ## 1.7.2002, arrears will be paid only from 1.7.2003. 3. The Government thereafter issued G.O.(M.S.)No.166/2005/ Co-op. dated 18.7.2005 which introduced certain amendments to the Government order dated 21.6.2005. Paragraph 9 was however not amended. Later, by G.O.(M.S.)No.251/2005/Co-op. dated 5.10.2005, a copy of which is produced and marked as Ext.P3 in W.P.(C)No.7146 of 2017, the Government amended Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005 and stipulated as follows: “ശമളപര�ഷരണ ഉതരവനസര�ച� 01.07.2002 ന� 30.06.2003 ന� ഇട.� ജ�ല� സഹകരണ ബ�ങകള�ൽ ന�ന� മപൻഷൻ പറ�പ�ര�ഞ ജ�വനക�ർക� ശമളപര�ഷരണത�മC ആനകല�� ലഭ�കകയ�മലന� ആയത� . വ�തവചനപരമ�മണന� മപൻഷൻക�രമട സ�ഘടനകൾ ചണ�ക�ണ�ച�ടണ� ഈ സ�ഹചര�ത�ൽ ചവമട തചർകന തഭദഗത� വരത�മക�ണ� ഉതരവ� . പറമQടവ�കന 3) 01.07.2002 ന� 30.06.2003 ന� ഇട.� (രണ� ദ�വസവ� ഉൾമQമട) ജ�ല� സഹകരണ ബ�ങ�ൽ ന�ന� മപൻഷൻ പറ� പ�ര�ഞ ജ�വനക�ർക� മ�ത� 01.07.2002 മതലള ശമളപര�ഷരണ കട�ശ�ക നൽക�വനത�ണ�.” 4. It is evident from the recitals in Ext.P3 that such an amendment was incorporated having regard to the representation received from employees of District Co-operative Banks who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 and 30.6.2003. By Ext.P3 order dated 5.10.2005, the Government clarified that arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 pursuant to ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:4:-** the revision of pay and allowances by Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005 will be given only to those who retired from service during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003, both days inclusive. 5. The Government did not leave the matter there. It again amended Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005 by issuing G.O. (M.S.)No.21/2007/Co-op. dated 6.1.2007 (Ext.P4) and stipulated as follows: “(2) സഹകരണ സ�ഘ� രജ�സ�റമട ഇക�ര�ത�ലള ശപ�ർശയ� ജ�ല� സഹകരണ ബ�ങകള�ൽ ന�ന� റ�ടയർ മചയ ജ�വനക�രമട അഭ�ർതന കണക�മലടത� ഇക�ര�� സർക�ർ തലത�ൽ വ�ശദമ�യ� പര�തശ�ധ�കകയണ�യ�. ഈ സ�ഹചര�ത�ൽ, 1.7.2002 ന� 30.6.2003 ന� ഇടയള ക�ലയളവ�ൽ മപൻഷൻ പറ� പ�ര�ഞ എല� വ�ഭ�ഗ� ജ�വനക�ർക� അവരവർ തജ�ല� മചയ ക�ലയളവനസര�ച� കട�ശ�ക നൽക�ന� 30.6.2003-ന തശഷ� മപൻഷൻ പറ� പ�ര�ഞ എല� മപൻഷൻക�ർക� 12 മ�സമത (1.7.2002-ന� 30.6.2003-ന� ഇടയള ക�ലയളവ�മല ശമള ആനകല�� കണക�ക�) കട�ശ�ക ആനകല�� അനവദ�ചമക�ണ� ഉതരവ�കന.” By the said Government order, the Government clarified that after taking into account the recommendations of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies and the representations received from former employees of District Co-operative Banks, employees who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 will be paid arrears of salary and allowances corresponding to the period they were in service and those who retired after 30.6.2003 will be paid arrears for the ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:5:-** entire period of 12 months from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. 6. The Government thereafter issued G.O.(M.S.)No.96/2007/Coop. dated 20.3.2007 (Ext.P5) whereby it directed as follows: “(2) സഹകരണ സ�ഘ� രജ�സ�റമട ഇക�ര�ത�ലള ശപ�ർശ കണക�മലടത� ഇക�ര�� സർക�ർ തലത�ൽ വ�ശദമ�യ� പര�തശ�ധ�കകയണ�യ�. ഈ സ�ഹചര�ത�ൽ, 1.7.2002-ന� 30.6.2003-ന� ഇടയള ക�ലയളവ�ൽ മപൻഷൻ പറ� പ�ര�ഞ എല� വ�ഭ�ഗ� ജ�വനക�ർക� അവരവർ തജ�ല� മചയ ക�ലയളവനസര�ച� കട�ശ�ക നൽക�ന� 30.6.2003 മതൽ 31.5.2005 വമരയള വ�വ�ധ ക�ലയളവ�ൽ മപൻഷൻ പറ� പ�ര�ഞ എല� മപൻഷൻക�ർക� 12 മ�സമത കട�ശ�ക ആനകല�� (1.7.2002-ന� 30.6.2003-ന� ഇടയള ക�ലയളവ�മല ശമള ആനകല�� കണക�ക�) അനവദ�ചമക�ണ� ഉതരവ�കന.” By Ext.P5 order, the Government clarified that all employees who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 will be paid arrears of salary for the period they were in service and those who retired during the period from 30.6.2003 to 31.5.2005 will also be paid arrears of salary during the said period of 12 months. 7. Pursuant to the revision of pay and allowances with effect from 1.7.2002 as ordered in Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005, revised salary and allowances were disbursed to all employees of District Co-operative Banks who were in service as on 1.7.2003. They were however not paid arrears during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 in view of the stipulation in that regard ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:6:-** contained in paragraph 9 of Ext.P2 Government order. After Exts.P3, P4 and P5 Government orders were issued, modifying the terms of Ext.P2 and giving the benefit of arrears of revised pay and allowances initially to those employees who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 and later to all employees who retired during the period from 30.6.2003 to 31.5.2005, six former employees of Alappuzha District Co-operative Bank who retired during the period from 31.7.2006 to 31.5.2008 moved the Government claiming arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 by submitting Ext.P2 representation dated 13.11.2008, produced and marked in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009. Later, yet another employee submitted Ext.P3 representation dated 22.10.2008 produced and marked in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009, to the President and the General Manager of the Alappuzha District Co-operative Bank, seeking disbursement of arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. They relied on Ext.P4 Government order dated 6.1.2007 in support of their claims. 8. When no action was taken in the matter they filed W.P. (C)No.35804 of 2008 in this court. By judgment delivered on 4.12.2008, a learned single Judge of this court disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the State Government to consider their ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:7:-** representations and pass appropriate orders thereon after affording them an opportunity of being heard. Pursuant thereto, the Principal Secretary to Government, Co-operation Department heard them on 3.3.2008 and thereafter issued G.O.(Rt)No.144/2009/Co-op. dated 19.3.2009 holding that in view of G.O.(M.S.)No.96/2007/Co-op. dated 20.3.2007 (Ext.P5) which provides for payment of arrears of salary and allowances only to those who retired during the period from 30.6.2003 to 31.5.2005, employees who retired after 31.5.2005 are not entitled to arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. 9. They thereupon filed W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 in this court challenging the Government order dated 19.3.2009, a copy of which was produced and marked as Ext.P5 therein. They contended that there is no rationale behind limiting arrears of monetary benefits during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 to those who retired prior to 31.5.2005 and that persons similarly situate have been discriminated against. The Alappuzha District Co-operative Bank filed a counter affidavit resisting W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009. It was contended that the Government took a decision to restrict disbursement of arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 only to those employees who retired prior ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:8:-** to 31.5.2005 having regard to the fact that many among the District Co-operative Banks were running at a loss and enlargement of the benefit to other employees would affect the financial stability of the District Co-operative Banks. 10. The learned single Judge considered the rival contentions and allowed W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 by judgment delivered on 15.12.2013. The learned single Judge held that though there can be a classification based on the date of retirement provided the discrimination has some nexus with the object sought to be achieved, in the case on hand there is no nexus or classification, that as all employees were discharging the same functions or duties, there cannot be a discrimination among the employees who form one class, based on the date of retirement. The learned single Judge held that the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.34683 of 2009 are entitled to arrears of monetary benefits during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. The learned single Judge however held that the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.34683 of 2009 alone would be entitled to such benefits and that the impugned orders are interfered with only to the extent it applies to them. Paragraph 6 of the judgment delivered by the learned single Judge on 15.12.2016 in W.P.(C) No.34683 of 2009 reads as follows: “ _6. The projected reason in this counter that the financial stability of the Bank would be affected cannot be a reason to_ ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:9:-** _discriminate employees who forms into a class themselves by virtue of their employment. In fact, by virtue of the pay fixation, all employees are eligible for monetary benefits for the period 01.07.2002 to 30.06.2003. This pay revision certainly have some nexus with nature of employment they had with the service of Co-operative Bank. All these employees were discharging the same functions or duties for the purpose of making them eligible to draw the monetary benefits for the same period. Therefore, thus monetary benefits now claimed by the petitioners are having nexus with their service. In that view of the matter, there cannot be a discrimination among the employees who formed to a class based on the service for the period 01.07.2002 to 30.06.2003. Any denial of monetary benefits, thus, for the petitioners will amount to denial of the equal pay for equal work. Therefore, this Court is of the view that petitioners are entitled for the monetary benefits based on pay revision for the period 01.07.2002 to 30.06.2003. This Court is of the view that petitioners also should be given minimum interest at the rate of 6% on the amount due. The amount shall be disbursed to the petitioners within 2 months. It is made clear that the petitioners alone would be entitled for such benefit. This Court had not chosen to interfere with impugned orders except to the extent it made applicable to the petitioners._ ” As stated earlier, the said judgment is under challenge in W.A.No.1231 of 2017 and it is relying on the aforesaid judgment that the other writ petitions from which the connected writ appeals arise, were allowed. 11. We heard Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in W.A.Nos.1222, 1231 and 1247 of 2017, Sri.T.A.Shaji, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellants in W.A.No.1538 of 2017 and 162 and 163 of 2018 and Sri.N.Reghuraj, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in W.A.Nos.380 and 390 of 2018. We also heard Sri.Sunilkumar Kuriakose, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the State of Kerala and Sri.P.N.Mohanan, ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:10:-** Sri.George Jacob, Sri.V.G.Arun and Sri.B.Ashok Shenoy, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners who have been arrayed as respondents in these appeals. Learned counsel for the appellants raised two main contentions. The first contention is that the claim made by the writ petitioners is belated. It is contended that though the last among the Government orders was issued on 20.3.2007 and the writ petitioners retired from service shortly thereafter, they moved this court only in the year 2017. It is also contended that in any view of the matter, as the learned single Judge had while allowing W.P.(C) No.34683 of 2009 limited the relief to the seven petitioners therein, relief could not have been granted to the petitioners in the other writ petitions, relying on the judgment therein. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that relief was granted to the petitioners in W.P. (C) No.34683 of 2009 as they had moved the Government within a reasonable time but the claim made by the petitioners in the other writ petitions is belated and therefore the benefit of the judgment in W.P. (C) No.34683 of 2009 cannot be extended to them. Relying on the decision of the Apex Court in **State of Uttar Pradesh and others v. Arvind Kumar Stivastava and others** [(2015) 1 SCC 347] learned counsel for the appellants contended that the judgment in W.P. (C)No.34683 of 2009 is a judgment in personam, holding that the ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:11:-** benefit of the judgment shall accrue only to the parties before the court and as such an intention is expressly stated in the judgment, those who intend to get benefit of the said judgment will have to satisfy the court that their petition does not suffer from either laches, delay or acquiescence. Learned counsel submitted that in the instant case as none of the writ petitioners have explained the long delay in moving this court challenging the denial of benefit to them, the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. Learned counsel also relied on the decision of the Apex Court in **Union** **of India and others v. Shri Hanuman Industries and another** [(2015) 6 SCC 600] in support of the said submission. 12. Per contra, learned counsel for the writ petitioners submitted that though initially the Government had in Ext.P2 Government order dated 18.7.2005 stipulated that no one will be entitled to arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003, later by Exts.P3, P4 and P5 Government orders dated 5.10.2005, 6.1.2007 and 20.3.2007 employees who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 31.5.2005 were given arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 leaving out employees who retired from service thereafter. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners submitted that such denial of benefit is ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:12:-** arbitrary and discriminatory for the reason that the classification has no nexus with the object sought to be achieved and persons who are similarly situate have been discriminated against. Learned counsel submitted that employees who retired prior to 1.7.2002 are not entitled to the benefit of the pay revision, that as per Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005, no employee who was in service as on 1.7.2002 was entitled to arrears of salary and allowances for the period up to 30.6.2003, that all employees were entitled to only fixation of pay, but later the Government decided to give arrears of pay and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 initially to those who retired during the said period and later to those who retired after 30.6.2003, that all the writ petitioners fall in the said category, that still later by Ext.P5 Government order dated 20.3.2007, the Government limited disbursement of arrears of salary and allowances for the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003, to those who retired during the said period and also during the period from 30.6.2003 to 30.6.2005, thereby discriminating amongst persons similarly situate. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners also submitted that the only ground put forward to deny relief to the writ petitioners is that the financial stability of the banks would be affected, that this cannot be a reason to discriminate among the employees who ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:13:-** were in service as on 1.7.2002 for the reason that all are similarly situate and merely based on the date of retirement, the Government could not have denied arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003, to those who retired after 30.6.2005. As regards delay and laches, learned counsel submitted that the case on hand is a case of a continuing wrong giving rise to a recurring cause of action and therefore the principles of delay and laches can have no application. Learned counsel submitted that in such circumstances, no interference is called for with the impugned judgment. 13. We have considered the submissions made at the Bar by learned counsel appearing on either side. We have also gone through the pleadings and the materials on record. Salary and allowances of employees of District Co-operative Banks were revised by Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005. Though by that Government order, pay and allowances were revised with effect from 1.7.2002 it was stipulated therein that employees will not be entitled to arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. Pursuant to the representations received from employees, the Government later amended Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005, by issuing the Government order dated 18.7.2005. The ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:14:-** said Government order did not amend paragraph 9 of the Government order dated 21.6.2005 which denied arrears of salary during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. Employees who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 represented before the Government contending that though the pay revision had taken effect while they were in service, they are denied the benefit of the pay revision. The Government thereupon amended paragraph 9 of Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005 by issuing Ext.P3 Government order dated 5.10.2005 and stipulated that those employees who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 (both days inclusive), will be given the benefit of arrears of salary and allowances in relaxation of the stipulation in paragraph 9 of Ext.P2 Government order dated 21.6.2005. 14. The Government later issued Ext.P4 Government order dated 6.1.2007, following a representation received from employees who retired from District Co-operative Banks on 31.7.2003. The said group of employees contended that there was disparity in the payment of arrears among employees who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 and those who retired thereafter, namely on 31.7.2003. It appears the Registrar of Co-operative Societies favourably recommended their case. The Government thereupon issued Ext.P4 ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:15:-** order dated 6.1.2007 whereby the Government clarified that even employees who retired after 30.6.2003 will be paid arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. If that Government order had stood, none of the writ petitioners would have been aggrieved. They would have got arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. However for reasons not attributable to them, they were not given the said benefit for the reason that the Government thereafter issued Ext.P5 Government order dated 20.3.2007 whereby it limited the benefit to those employees who retired during the period from 30.6.2003 to 31.5.2005 in addition to those who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. This resulted in a situation where those who retired after 31.5.2005 were denied arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. 15. The writ petitioners in these cases are employees who retired after 31.5.2005 and but for Ext.P5 Government order dated 20.3.2007 all of them would have got the benefit of Ext.P4 Government order dated 6.1.2007. All the petitioners including the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 challenge Ext.P5 Government order dated 20.3.2007. The petitioners in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 challenge also the Government order dated 19.3.2009 whereby the ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:16:-** Government declined to extend to them the benefit of payment of arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 relying on Ext.P5 Government order dated 20.3.2007. The learned single Judge has in W.P.(C)No.36483 of 2009, from which W.A.No.1231 of 2017 arises, considered the challenge to the aforesaid Government order which extended to employees, who have retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 31.5.2005, the benefit of payment of arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 and held that the action of the State in limiting payment of arrears to those who retired during the period from 1.7.2002 to 31.5.2005 is arbitrary and discriminatory. The learned single Judge however limited the grant of relief to the petitioners therein. In coming to the said conclusion, the learned single Judge placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in **D.S.Nakara and others v. Union of India** (AIR 1983 SC 130) and **V.Kasturi v. Managing Director, State Bank of India, Bombay and another** [(1998) 8 SCC 30]. 16. The Apex Court has in **D.S.Nakara** (supra) held as follows in paragraph 32:- _“32. Having succinctly focussed our attention on the conspectus of elements and incidents of pension the main question may not be tackled. But, the approach of Court while considering such measure is of paramount importance. Since the advent of_ ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:17:-** _the Constitution, the State action must be directed towards attaining the goals set out in Part IV of the Constitution which, when achieved, would permit us to claim that we have set up a welfare State. Article 38(1) enjoins the State to strive to promote welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effective as it may a social order in which justice social, economic and political shall inform all institutions of the national life. In particular the State shall strive to minimise the inequalities in income and endeavour to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities. Article 39(d) enjoins a duty to see that there is equal pay for equal work for both men and women and this directive should be understood and interpreted in the light of the judgment of this Court in Randhir Singh v. Union of India, (1982) 1 SCC 618 : (AIR 1982 SC 879). Revealing the scope and content of this facet of equality, Chinnappa Reddy, J. speaking for the Court observed as under (para 1):_ _“Now, thanks to the rising social and political consciousness and the expectations roused as a consequence and the forward looking posture of this Court, the underprivileged also are clamouring for their rights and are seeking the intervention of the Court with touching faith and confidence in the Court. The Judges of the Court have a duty to redeem their constitutional oath and do justice no less to the pavement dweller than to the guest of the Five Star hotel.”_ _Proceeding further, this Court observed that where all relevant considerations are the same, persons holding identical posts may not be treated differently in the matter of their pay merely because they belong to different departments. If that can't be done when they are in service, can that be done during their retirement? Expanding this principle, one can confidently say that if pensioners form a class, their computation cannot be by different formula affording unequal treatment solely on the ground that some retired earlier and some retired later. Article 39 (e) requires the State to secure that the health and strength of workers, men and women, and children of tender age are not abused and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter avocations unsuited to their age or strength. Article 41 obligates the State within the limits of its economic capacity and development, to make effective provision for securing the right to work, to education and to provide assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of undeserved want. Article 43(3) requires the State to endeavour to secure amongst other things full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural opportunities.” (emphasis supplied)_ ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:18:-** 17. The reason projected in the instant cases for discriminating amongst the pensioners is that the financial stability of the District Cooperative Banks would be affected if employees are paid arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. We could have accepted this contention if the stipulation in Ext.P2 pay revision order as it originally stood was not modified or altered. In the pay revision order originally issued it was stipulated that no employee would be entitled to arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. Later this was relaxed in the case of those who retired during that period and still later it was relaxed in respect of every employee when the Government issued Ext.P4 order dated 6.1.2007. The Government thereafter issued Ext.P5 order dated 20.3.2007 which permitted disbursement of arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 only to those who retired during the said period and also during the period from 30.6.2003 to 31.5.2005. In other words, the prohibition regarding payment of arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 which was uniformly applicable to all employees in service as on 1.7.2002 was waived only in respect of a group of employees who were similarly situate as on 1.7.2002, the date of effect of the pay revision. One need not labour much to hold that the ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:19:-** discrimination has no nexus with the object sought to be achieved and that the classification of employees is also not based on any intelligible differentia. The learned single Judge was therefore perfectly right in holding that the petitioners in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 are entitled to the benefit of Ext.P4 Government order dated 6.1.2007. It was in the wake of the aforesaid judgment that the connected writ petitions were filed. In our considered opinion, no grounds have been made out to interfere with the judgment in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009. ## 18. The Apex Court has in **State of Uttar Pradesh and others** ## **v. Arvind Kumar Stivastava and others** [supra] held as follows: “ _22.1. The normal rule is that when a particular set of employees is given relief by the court, all other identically situated persons need to be treated alike by extending that benefit. Not doing so would amount to discrimination and would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. This principle needs to be applied in service matters more emphatically as the service jurisprudence evolved by this Court from time to time postulates that all similarly situated persons should be treated similarly. Therefore, the normal rule would be that merely because other similarly situated persons did not approach the Court earlier, they are not to be treated differently._ _22.2. However, this principle is subject to wellrecognised exceptions in the form of laches and delays as well as acquiescence. Those persons who did not challenge the wrongful action in their cases and acquiesced into the same and woke up after long delay only because of the reason that their counterparts who had approached the court earlier in time succeeded in their efforts, then such employees cannot claim that the benefit of the judgment rendered in the case of similarly situated persons be extended to them. They would be treated as fence-sitters and laches and delays, and/or the acquiescence, would be a valid ground to dismiss their claim._ ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:20:-** _22.3. However, this exception may not apply in those cases where the judgment pronounced by the court was judgment in rem with intention to give benefit to all similarly situated persons, whether they approached the court or not. With such a pronouncement the obligation is cast upon the authorities to itself extend the benefit thereof to all similarly situated persons. Such a situation can occur when the subject-matter of the decision touches upon the policy matters, like scheme of regularisation and the like (see K.C. Sharma v. Union of India). On the other hand, if the judgment of the court was in personam holding that benefit of the said judgment shall accrue to the parties before the court and such an intention is stated expressly in the judgment or it can be impliedly found out from the tenor and language of the judgment, those who want to get the benefit of the said judgment extended to them shall have to satisfy that their petition does not suffer from either laches and delays or acquiescence._ ” 19. The case on hand is covered by the observations in paragraph 22.3, where the Apex Court has held that if the judgment of the court was in personam holding that benefit of the said judgment shall accrue to the parties before the court and such an intention is stated expressly in the judgment or it can be impliedly found out from the tenor and language of the judgment, those who want to get the benefit of the said judgment extended to them shall have to satisfy that their petition does not suffer from either laches and delay or acquiescence. The appellants in W.A.No.1231 of 2017 have no case that W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. The challenge in that writ petition is on the merits of the claim. It is in the connected cases that the ground of delay and ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:21:-** laches is put forward. The judgment in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 was delivered on 15.12.2006. The other writ petitions were filed immediately thereafter namely in March and April, 2017. It is no doubt true that none of the petitioners had challenged Ext.P5 Government order dated 20.3.2007 as soon as it was passed. They accepted it and retired from service. It was only after the petitioners in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 succeeded in getting relief that the other writ petitions were filed. As the dispute is about denial of arrears of salary and allowances, which stood revised with effect from 1.7.2002, for a period of 12 months commencing from 1.7.2002 and ending with 30.6.2003 and as the petitioners had moved this court within three months after W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 was allowed by a learned single Judge of this court, we find no reason or justification to deny relief to the petitioners on the ground that there was delay and laches and acquiescence on their part. 20. We however notice that the learned single Judge has directed disbursement of arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003 with 6% interest. Except the petitioners in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009, the others had not moved the Government or this court in time. The petitioners in the connected writ petitions moved this court only in the year 2017. The Apex Court has in **Union** ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:22:-** **of India v. Tarsem Singh** [2009 (1) KLT 101 (SC)] held that where a service related claim is based on a continuing wrong, relief can be granted even if there is a long delay as it does not affect the rights of third parties. It was also held that in such cases interest on arrears should be declined. In the instant case, if the claim made by the petitioners is granted it would not affect the settled rights of third parties. It will also not result in the reopening of issues already concluded. It would not also affect the seniority of employees in service or their promotions. In the light of these facts, we find no reason or justification to deny relief to the petitioners on the ground of delay and laches. However, as the petitioners in W.P.(C)Nos.7146, 11337, 11344, 20741, 22430, 26955 and 27455 of 2017 moved this court only after W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 was heard and allowed, in the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in **Union of India v. Tarsem Singh** (supra) we are of the opinion that they are not entitled to interest. The petitioners in W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009, from which W.A.No.1231 of 2017 arises, stand on a different footing. They had moved the Government claiming arrears of salary and allowances in the year 2008. They had thereafter moved this court on two occasions and it was in the last occasion that relief was granted to them. Merely for the reason that they were granted interest the ## **W.A.No.1222 of 2017 & conn. cases** ## **-:23:-** petitioners in the other cases be granted that benefit. We are therefore of the opinion that except the petitioners in W.P. (C)No.34683 of 2009, the petitioners in the other writ petitions are not entitled to interest on the arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. For the reasons stated above, we dismiss W.A.No.1231 of 2017, allow W.A.Nos.1222, 1247 and 1538 of 2017 and W.A.Nos.162, 163, 380 and 390 of 2018 in part to the extent it relates to the award of interest and vacate the direction issued by the learned single Judge in the respective writ petitions to pay interest on the amounts due and payable to the petitioners therein towards arrears of salary and allowances during the period from 1.7.2002 to 30.6.2003. The judgments impugned in W.A.Nos.1222, 1247 and 1538 of 2017 and W.A.Nos.162, 163, 380 and 390 of 2018 shall stand affirmed in all other respects. No costs. Sd/- **P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE** Sd/- **R.NARAYANA PISHARADI JUDGE** **kav/vpv**