Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner, a Professor working in the first respondent University, filed Exhibit P5 representation before the second respondent seeking refixation of salary in terms of Exhibits P1 and P4.
3. As could be seen from the record, Exhibit P1 was issued by the second respondent in the light of judicial directions issued by this Court, as have been confirmed by the Honourable Supreme Court. In so far as Exhibit P4 is concerned, it was issued by the Redressal Committee under W.P.(c) No. 31503 of 2014 2 UGC Scheme. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner's Exhibit P5 representation is required to be considered by the second respondent in terms of the guidelines and directions provided in Exhibits P1 and P4.
4. The learned Standing Counsel representing the second and third respondents has submitted that the petitioner worked up to 2011 in Kerala Agricultural University, and that now he is working in the first respondent University. According to him, it is not possible for the second respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner covering the entire period of his career.
5. Be that as it may, for whatever period the second respondent could consider Exhibit P5 representation, he could pass appropriate orders to the said extent. With regard to rest of the period, it is for the petitioner to take appropriate steps thereof.
6. In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, without expressing any opinion on the merits W.P.(c) No. 31503 of 2014 3 of the matter, this Court disposes of the present writ petition with a direction to the second respondent to consider Exhibit P5 representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-