IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2009 / 3RD ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 19491 of 2005(U) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.P.KAMALA, L.P.S.A, CHEMBAD PODIKALAM, L.P.SCHOOL, P.O.CHEMBAD, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.POOVAMULLE PAMBIL ABDUL KAREEM. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, ACCOUNTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHOKLI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 5. HEADMASTER, CHEMBAD PODIKALAM L.P.SCHOOL, P.O.CHEMBAD, KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. MUHAMOOD T.T. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.19491/2005-U: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE OPTION EXERCISED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 12/02/99. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. B/2815/04 DTD. 14/06/2004 AND THE STATEMENT. EXT.P.2.A: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. B/2815/04 DTD. 09/06/2004 ISSUED BY THE R.4. TO THE R.5. EXT.P.2.B: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. B/2615/04 DTD. 11/02/2005 HANDED OVER BY THE R.5. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE G.O.(P).NO.365/05/FIN. DTD. 06/08/2005. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE RE-OPTION ALONGWITH STATEMENT OF FIXATION OF PAY DTD. 04/10/2005. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE CHALAN RECEIPT. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE R.4. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 19491 of 2005-U - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner has already retired from service on 31.3.2009. This writ petition has been filed, prior to her retirement, under the following circumstances. She entered service as a qualified teacher on 22.3.1982. After 10 years, she was granted the first higher grade on 22.3.1992. By Ext.P1, the petitioner had opted to the pay revision of 1997 with effect from 1.3.1997. That was accepted by the competent authority and consequently her pay was fixed and revised in the scale of Rs.4500 – 7000. Increments for the years 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 were also sanctioned respectively. On completion of 18 years of service, she was also granted Senior Grade in the scale of Rs.5000 – 8150. 2. By Ext.P2, an objection was raised regarding the fixation of pay, by the Deputy Director of Education stating that the reckoning of 15 years weightage is irregular and that refixation was not properly done. The salary was revised accordingly. By Ext.P2(a), she was directed to refund the amounts also. It is at that stage this writ petition was filed and this court had granted an interim order of stay of further recovery in the matter. wpc 19491/2005 2 3. During the pendency of the writ petition, by Ext.P3 dated 6.8.2005 the Government permitted a chance for re-option to State Government employees and staff of aided schools and colleges in respect of the 1997 pay revision in cases involving retrospective reduction in the revised pay consequent on audit scrutiny. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted re- option as per Ext.P4 and the excess amount was also refunded. Ext.P4(a) is the statement of fixation. Thereafter, by Ext.P6 it was informed by the Deputy Director of Education that the same cannot be accepted, as the monetary benefits will be available only from the date on which the reoption was submitted. This is under challenge in this writ petition. 4. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit justifying the action. The issue is covered in favour of the petitioner by the decision of a Division Bench of this court in State of Kerala v. Lissy Joseph (2005 (4) KLT SN page 70, Case No.97). It was held by this court that arrears consequent on re-option of higher grades are admissible from the date of effect of re-option and not from the date of filing of re-option. It was held thus: “The only dispute to be resolved in these appeals is whether arrears consequent on reoption of higher grades are admissible from the date of effect of re-option or from the date of filing of re-option. wpc 19491/2005 3 It is now clear that what is intended is the date of effect of re-option and not the date of actual exercise of re-option. Excess of amount due after calculating the same from the date of effect of reoption can be entitled to set off against the refunds due from the employee and the amount due, if any, arising after the date of re-option alone need be refunded to the Government.” 5. In the light of the above, the reasons shown in Ext.P6 cannot be sustained. Therefore, the Ext.P2 series and Ext.P6 quashed. There will be a direction to the third respondent to accept the re-option submitted by the petitioner as per Ext.P4 and sanction the refixation of pay along with consequential benefits. Appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/