Judgment :- 1. Petitioners 3 in number, were appointed in the contingent staff of the 2nd respondent-panchayat. They have approached this court claiming the benefits of Ext. P1 order from 1-7-1978 because the 2nd respondent-Panchayat by Ext. P3 resolution decided to give benefit of Ext. P1 only with effect from 1-4-1981. 2. It is common case that the petitioners were contingent employees engaged by the 2nd respondent-Panchayat. Third petitioner left the service of the 2nd respondent on 24-12-1980. Petitioners 1 and 2 are still in the service of the 2nd respondent. 3. By Ext. P1 order dated 15-7-1980, the Government revised the scales of pay of contingent employees in the Panchayats in the State. As per that order Ferry Men who were on an existing pay of Rs. 115/- were entitled to get revised pay of Rs. 215/- per month with effect from 1-7-1978 Petitioners were not paid salary at the enhanced rate. The Panchayat by Ext. P3 resolution dated 12-11-1980, decided to give the enhanced salary to the employees with effect from 1-4-1981. No reason is mentioned in that resolution for fixing 1-4-1981 as the date from which the benefits are to be given. Nor had the Panchayat stated in Ext. P3 that the employees will not be paid the enhanced salary from 1-7-1978 to 1-4-1981. 4. On behalf of the 3rd respondent, the Director of Panchayats, detailed counter affidavit has been filed. The stand taken therein is that for giving effect to Ext. P1 order of the Government the Panchayat had to pass a resolution adopting that decision. The 2nd respondent-Panchayat did not pass such a resolution and so the Panchayat it not to give effect to Ext. P1. In the absence of such a resolution the employees are not to claim the benefit of Ext. P1. It is further contended, that the Panchayat was not in a position to meet additional liability due to the employees, because of the poor financial position. 5. S.39 of the Kerala Panchayats Act authorises the Director to fix the salaries, fees and allowances payable to officers and servants of every Panchayat other than Executive Officers. Such an order passed by the Director is binding on the Panchayat. Salaries, fees and allowance so fixed by the Director are payable to the servants of the Panchayat and are to be given effect to by the Panchayat. Such an order passed by the Director is binding on the Panchayat. Salaries, fees and allowance so fixed by the Director are payable to the servants of the Panchayat and are to be given effect to by the Panchayat. No provision of the Panchayat Act or rules framed therein provides that the order passed by the Director of Panchayats should be adopted by the Panchayat by a resolution for the Executive Officer of that Panchayat to implement the same. Rules framed in the Kerala Panchayats Act are to the effect that the Panchayats are bound by the directions given by the Director. Reference may be made to Clause (1) of Rule (5) of the Panchayats Common Service Rules, 1977. It states that every Panchayat shall be bound to disburse the pay and allowances of an employee serving under it, at such rate as may be fixed by the Director from time to time. This provision takes within its purview the pay and allowances of all employees serving in a Panchayat. It makes no distinction between regular employees and contingent employees. In the absence of any rule which envisages resolution of the Panchayat adopting the direction given by the Director, the order passed by the Director under S.39 is binding on all the Panchayats. 6. Ext. P1 is an order passed by the Government after getting the proposals of Director of Panchayats on the question of revision of pay scales of full and part time contingent employees in the Panchayat. The proposals sent by the Director were considered by the Government and thereafter the scales of pay were fixed. The order thus passed by the Government can be considered to be one coming within the purview of S.39 of the Panchayats Act. It is binding on the Panchayat. The Executive Officer of the Panchayat is bound to give effect to that order even in the absence of a resolution of the Panchayat adopting that order. In this view the part-time contingent employees engaged by the 2nd respondent were entitled to get the benefit of pay revision ordered by the Government under Ext. P1 with effect from 1-7-1978. This benefit has not been extended to the petitioners till 1-4-1981. This is clearly erroneous. 7. In view of what has been stated above, I direct respondents 1 and 2 to disburse the benefit obtained by the petitioners under Ext. P1 with effect from 1-7-1978. This benefit has not been extended to the petitioners till 1-4-1981. This is clearly erroneous. 7. In view of what has been stated above, I direct respondents 1 and 2 to disburse the benefit obtained by the petitioners under Ext. Pi for the period from 1-7-1978 to 1-4-1981 in as far as petitioners 1 and 2 are concerned. The 3rd petitioner must be given similar benefit for the period from 1-7-1978 to 24-12-1980 the date on which he was transferred out of the 2nd respondent-Panchayat. The Original Petition is allowed in the above terms. I make no order as to costs. Issue photo copy/ carbon copy of the judgment to the parties on usual terms.