IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2009 / 20TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20305 of 2008(P) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- M. ABDUL RAZAK, RETIRED HEADMASTER, MUNDASSERY HOUSE, P.O. TOLAVANUR,VIA VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUTTIPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.N. MANOJKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 20305/2008-P APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE GO(P)180/91/(100)/FIN. DATED 07/03/1991. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 20/03/1992. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE GO(RT)NO.7859/98/FIN DATED 18/12/1998. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 15/07/1999. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20/09/1999 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE LETTER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE CHIEF MINISTER DATED 13/05/2007. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 03/07/2007. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 05/02/2008. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 08/2/2008 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 12/03/2008. EXT.P12: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04/03/2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P13: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19/05/2008. EXT.P14: COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF NATIONAL FIXATION OF PAY FOR PRIMARY SCHOOL HEADMASTERS DATED 17/07/1999 AS PER GO(P)480/89/FIN. DATED 01/11/1989 AND EXTS.P1 & P3. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.20305 OF 2008 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner who retired as Headmaster on 31.04.1995 has approached this Court challenging Exhibit P12 whereby the Government rejected his representation regarding the notional fixation of pay for various pay revisions. The petitioner commenced his service on 07.02.1961 and was promoted as Headmaster on 14.06.1965. The petitioner was not granted the time bound higher grade since he was granted the scale of pay of Headmaster. He was getting only two increments less than the persons who are having the same service and lesser service than that of the petitioner. In respect of such Headmasters, by Exhibit P1, the Government permitted submission of re-option. Accordingly, he submitted re-option which was objected as per Exhibit P2. Thereafter, he approached the Government and the Government passed Exhibit P3 order permitting him to submit re- option in respect of pay revisions of the years 1973, 1978, 1983, W.P.(C) No.20305/2008 2 1988 and 1992 with certain conditions. Mainly it is on condition that the re-option will be allowed for the limited purpose of pensionary claims only. Thereafter, re-option was submitted and the pay was fixed as per Exhibit P4. Exhibit P5 shows that the defects pointed out earlier were rectified. But, by Exhibit P6, again audit objection was brought to his notice. The petitioner submitted Exhibit P7 representation. He has produced Exhibits P9 and P10 to show that subsequent objections have been dropped by the Accountant General. By Exhibit P12, his representation stands rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit granted as per Exhibit P1 namely, paragraph 2(i). It is contended that the persons like the petitioner who could not get the higher grade earlier are benefited by paragraph 2(i) of Exhibit P1. In his case, by Exhibit P3, the Government has passed a fresh order whereby sanction has been granted to exercise re-option in respect of various pay revisions between 1973 and 1992. The petitioner had submitted his re-option only in accordance with Exhibit P3 W.P.(C) No.20305/2008 3 and therefore, the stand taken by the respondents are not correct. 3. In Exhibit P6, the objection raised regarding re-option submitted is that the petitioner could have exercised re-option based on Exhibit P3 only for the scale of pay of HM in the pay revisions from 1973 onwards and for HM Higher Grade. This is the crux of the matter. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Exhibit P12 was passed without considering the effect of Exhibit P1 and the fact that Exhibit P3 allows re-option to him in terms of various pay revisions in the scale of pay of teacher. Reliance is placed on Exhibit P14 option statement also. The stand of the petitioner is opposed by the learned Government Pleader relying upon the averments in the counter affidavit. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if the petitioner is not allowed the benefit based on the re-option, he will get a lesser amount as pension and if an opportunity of personal hearing is afforded, he will be able to satisfy the Government that the stand taken in Exhibit P12 is not correct. W.P.(C) No.20305/2008 4 The question will therefore be re-examined by the Government in terms of Exhibits P1 and P3. Therefore, Exhibit P12 is set aside. There will be a direction to the Government to take a decision on Exhibit P7, with notice to the petitioner and after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp