IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 OP.No. 25058 of 1998(G) ----------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------------- 1. K.J.JOSEPH, STORE KEEPER, GOVERNMENT CENTRAL TEXT BOOK STORE, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. B.R.DEVASSY, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, EDAVANAKKADU P.O., VYPPIN PO. KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E), KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.N.MANOJ KUMAR THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP. NO.25058/1998 ORDER ON CMP. NO.44044/1998, 13343/99 IN OP. NO.25058/1998 DISMISSED 08.02.2008 SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K.DIS. 3101/92 DT. 7.8.92. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GF/23/B/DS-14/1561 DT. 4.12.97 OF THE SR.ACCOUNTS OFFICER. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GE/23/G/DIS. 13/1/56 DT. 10.12.97 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTNMENT DT. 10.2.98. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATIONFILED BY THE IST PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTNMENT DT. 20.2.98. EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP. NO.12193/98 DT. 30.6.98. EXT.P7:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.68774/PRU.1/98/FIN DT. 24.10.98. EXT.P8:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.68774/PRU.1/98/FIN. DT. 24.10.98. EXT.P9:- COPY OF THE PAY SALARY SLIP OF THE IST PETITIONER ON 23.10.97. EXT.P10:- COPY OF THE PAY SALARY SLIP DT. 8.3.99 OF THE IST PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS EXT.R1(a):- COPY OF THE G.O. DT. 9.6.94. EXT.R1(b):- COPY OF THE G.O. DT. 2.2.94. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.NO.25058 of 1998-G - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th February, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioners, at the time of filing the original petition, were working as Store Keeper and Senior Superintendent respectively. The relief sought for in the original petition relates to the challenge against Exts.P7 and P8. 2. The short facts are the following: The first petitioner was initially appointed as L.D. Clerk in the Education Department and was promoted as U.D. Clerk on 29.9.1980. Pursuant to the scheme for granting grade promotions, the first petitioner was granted the scale of Senior Grade U.D Clerk on completion of 20 years on 1.7.1988. He was granted the scale of Rs.1050-1830 as per the option exercised by him, which is the scale of pay of the post of Head Clerk. He was promoted as Head Clerk on 9.4.1992. Thereafter, he was granted four increments also. He was subsequently promoted as Junior Superintendent on 7.7.1992. As per Ext.P1 order dated 7.8.1992 issued by the Asst. Educational Officer, he was given fixation of pay. He was enjoying the benefit of the revised pay also in that promoted post. OP 25058/98 -2- 3. The second petitioner was initially appointed as L.D. Clerk in Education Department and was later promoted as U.D. Clerk in June, 1981. On completion of 20 years of service on 1.7.1988, he was given the grade after exercising the option in the grade of Head Clerk. He was promoted as Head Clerk on 23.9.1992 and as Junior Superintendent on 21.1.1993. He was granted the revised scale of Rs.1050-1830 which was subsequently revised to Rs.1400-2300. He had opted the 1992 pay revision with effect from 21.1.1993 in the promoted post of Junior Superintendent. 4. The fixation was objected as per Ext.P2 in the case of the second petitioner by the Accountant General's Office. Ext.P3 is the objection relates to the first petitioner. The substantial objection was that the post of Head Clerk should be taken as the first promotion post after 1.3.1992 and pay revision has to be done in that post. In the case of first petitioner, the other objection was in respect of the advance increment granted on promotion as Head Clerk. By Exts.P4 and P5, the petitioners submitted representations to clear the audit objections. They filed O.P. No.12193/1998 challenging the proposals and further seeking a direction to dispose of the representations. This court, by Ext.P6 judgment directed the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P5 and P6, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Thereafter, by OP 25058/98 -3- Exts.P7 and P8 their representations were rejected. The reasons stated in Exts.P7 and P8 are common. It is stated that as per the conditions laid down in 1992 pay revision order, option can be exercised only in respect of first promotion post assumed on or after 1.3.1992 which cannot be altered on the basis of individual cases. The petitioners challenge the said orders on various grounds. 5. The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit justifying the action. It is stated that the pay revision was effected as per G.O.(P) NO.600/93/Fin. Dated 25.9.1993 with effect from 1.3.1992. As regards the first petitioner, his pay was fixed in the promoted post by giving advance increment in terms of para 24 of the pay revision order dated 25.9.1993. He was later promoted as Junior Superintendent on 7.7.1992. In terms of the option submitted by him, his pay was fixed in the revised scale in the second promoted post after 1.3.1992. Reliance is placed on Exts.R1(a) and R1(b). 6. Heard Shri N.N. Sugunapalan, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and learned Govt. Pleader. 7. The two issues are governed by the provisions of G.O.(P) No.380/94(13)/Fin. dated 9.6.1994 and G.O.(P) No.81/94/(5)/Fin. dated 2.2.1994, which have been produced as Exts.R1(a) and R1(b). The relevant OP 25058/98 -4- clauses are clause 3 of Ext. R1(a) and clause 9 of Ext.R1(b). Clause 3 of Ext.R1(a) states that “advance increment will not be granted in the case of promotion from a time bound higher grade to a regular promotion post in the same scale of pay. Advance increment will be given only in cases where the promoted post and immediate lower feeder post have the same scale of pay.” Going by the said clause in Ext.R1(a), it is clear that the audit objection in respect of the first petitioner is perfectly justified. He was not entitled for the advance increment on promotion as Head Clerk. As regards the second issue also, as per clause 9 of Ext.R1(b), it was made clear that “only the next immediate promotion post assumed on or after 1.3.1992 can be opted. If there are more than one promoted post after the coming into force of the pay revision order.” Both petitioners had obtained promotion as Head Clerk and Junior Superintendent after 1.3.1992. They can opt for 1992 pay revision ony in the first promoted post after 1.3.1992, i.e. in the post of Head Clerk. Hence, the request of the petitioners made in their representations, Exts.P4 and P5 cannot be acceded to, in view of the clear terms in Exts.R1(a) and R1(b) as quoted above. These orders are not under challenge in the original petition. Therefore, the rejection of the representations by Exts.P7 and P8 is OP 25058/98 -5- perfectly justified. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/ OP 25058/98 -6- T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P. No.25058 of 1998-G - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 8th February, 2008.