IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 34432 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SIMON THOMAS, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS, RETIRED HEADMASTER, MTMHSS, PAMPAKUDA, RESIDING AT EDAPALAKATTU VEEDU, PIRAMADOM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY SRI.G.SHYAM RAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 1 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, EDUCATIONAL DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 1 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA - 661. BY G.P.SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.34432 OF 2010 ------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT As per Ext.P1 judgment dated 25th February,2010 in WP(C) No.36475 of 2003, the petitioner was granted a chance for reoption on various dates on which the petitioner's pay was to be refixed. The petitioner was directed to submit his reoption within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the said judgment. The District Educational Officer was directed to refix the petitioner's pay on various stages in accordance with the reoption, if that reoption was otherwise allowable. However, it was made clear that the reoption should not be refused to be accepted on the ground that the time for reoption was already over. It was also held thus: “The refixation shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of the reoption. If consequent to such refixation, any amount becomes refundable to the petitioner, the same shall be refunded to the petitioner within a period of one W.P.(C).No.34432 OF 2010 2 month thereafter. Since the petitioner has already retired from service on 31.3.2008, the retirement benefits shall be recomputed based on the refixation, which shall also be done along with the refixation itself. The arrears of retirement benefits if any, due shall also be disbursed within the period mentioned above.” 2. Thereafter, Ext.P3 order dated 27.5.2010 was passed by the District Educational Officer. It was held in Ext.P3 thus: “Accordingly the petitioner submitted re-option for various fixation of pay on 7.4.2010. On verifying the re-option thus produced it is found that the petitioner availed undue financial gain consequent on the re-option. It is therefore binding on the petitioner to refund the excess claim availed by him for the following period. 1. 1.8.88 to 31.10.88 2. 22.9.88 to 24.11.88 3. 1.9.92 to 31.10.95 4. 1.3.97 to 24.11.98 5. 1.5.06 to 31.10.06 And with due references to the Option and various Government Orders regulating the pay fixation, the pay of the petitioner have been finalized and statements for pay fixation thus made are appended herewith. Arrear claim if any consequent on the fixation shall be made by presenting a statement of excess drawal for the above mentioned period in order that the excess claim shall be adjusted in the arrear claim.” W.P.(C).No.34432 OF 2010 3 3. It would appear that a notice dated 24.6.2010 was sent on behalf of the petitioner to the District Educational Officer, to which Ext.P5 reply dated 16.7.2010 was sent by the District Educational Officer. It was stated in Ext.P5 that the petitioner's claim for revised sanction of increment with effect from 26.7.1979 was quite inadmissible. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner challenges Exts.P3 and P5. 4. The learned Government Pleader submitted that if the petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P3 and P5 he has an alternative remedy of a revision under Rule 92 of Chapter XIV A KER. That there is an alternative remedy is not in dispute. Since the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy, I do not think it is necessary to consider the correctness or otherwise of Exts.P3 and P5 in this Writ Petition. If the petitioner files a revision before the Government under Rule 92 of Chapter XIVA K.E.R within a period of one month from today, the W.P.(C).No.34432 OF 2010 4 same shall be considered by the Government within a period of three months thereafter. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms