IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 22ND JUNE 2009 / 1ST ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 9537 of 2009(J) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ ALLI.M.A.,KARIYALLIL HOUSE, P.O.MANNUTHY, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADVS. MR.ELVIN PETER P.J. MR.VARGHESE J.PUNNACHALIL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,AGRRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM. 2. KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. 3. THE REGISTRAR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, THRISSUR. 4. THE MANAGER, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOL,VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 6. THE DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.RENJITH THAMPAN, R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.MUHAMOOD T.T. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.9537/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 15.7.81 ISSUED BY THE KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY. P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 22.2.06 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY HELD ON 21.4.06. P4:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 5.3.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.9537/2009-J ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 22nd day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was appointed as a Lower Primary School Assistant in the Kerala Agricultural University Creche and School. She retired from service on 31/03/2006. By Ext.P2, the pensionary benefits were sanctioned to her. The fifth respondent raised an audit objection regarding the fixation of pay granted to the petitioner at the time of her appointment with a further direction to recover excess amount paid to the petitioner. The objection raised is with regard to the pay scale which was granted to the petitioner at the time of appointment. It was objected to by stating that the scale of pay of L.P.S.A in the Government School was Rs.340-535, whereas, the University has sanctioned a higher scale of pay at the rate of Rs.390-685 to the petitioner. Ext.P4 is the representation filed by the petitioner in the matter. The main challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P2 by which her pay was sought to be refixed, for the purpose of sanctioning the pensionary benefits. 2. Ext.P1 is the order by which the petitioner was appointed pursuant to the selection conducted by the Selection Committee of the W.P.(C). No.9537/2009 -:2:- University. She was offered the appointment in a scale of pay of Rs.390- 685. It is evident that the appointment is as permitted by the University First Statute. It is also evident from the appointment order itself that the scale of pay is as fixed by the University. Obviously, that was not at par with the scale of pay applicable to similar posts in the Government Schools. There is nothing to show that the scale of pay of the LPSA in the University should be on a par with the scale of pay of Teachers of Government Schools. In that view of the matter, the audit objection cannot survive. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C).No.4491/2009 wherein a similar issue was considered. It was found therein that in the absence of any competent order, whereby the University was obliged to adopt the same scale of pay as that was relevant in the Government schools at the same point of time, the objection cannot be sustained. A reference was made therein to Ext.P5 which provides a specific clause enabling the Executive Committee of the University to fix the salary and allowances. The learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that in regard to the petitioner herein also the salary was fixed in accordance with the First Statutes. Ext.P3 shows that the University had also requested to drop the audit objection. W.P.(C). No.9537/2009 -:3:- 4. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to succeed in the writ petition. The writ petition is allowed. Ext.P2 to the extent it refixes the pensionary benefits of the petitioner is quashed. The petitioner will be entitled for sanction of pensionary benefits as per the scale of pay which was sanctioned as per Ext.P1 and which was being drawn from time to time. Therefore, respondent Nos. 2 to 4 shall take steps to disburse the eligible pensionary benefits within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms