Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 6, apart from perusing the records. 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 Cluster Co- ordinator working under the 4th respondent, got his appointment through Exts.P1 and P2. After joining on 28/2/2013, initially the petitioner was paid salary and allowances attached to the post of Cluster Co-ordinator as per Ext.P4. Later, the 1st respondent reduced the scale of pay of the petitioner through Ext.P8. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed Ext.P9-revision petition before the 2nd respondent, who is a competent authority to address the grievance of the petitioner. Complaining of W.P.(c).No.27074 of 2014 : 2 :
its non-disposal, the petitioner approached this Court.
3. In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P9 revision petition, in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard in person to the petitioner.
Till decision is taken on Ext.P9 by the 2nd respondent, status quo shall be maintained regarding the pay of the petitioner.
Sd/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, Judge.
Dpk /True copy/ PS to Judge.
W.P.(c).No.27074 of 2014 : 3 :