IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34061 of 2006(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.M. BALAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.MILAN, DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER (RETD.) KUZHIKKATTU THARAYIL HOUSE, P.O.NJARAKKAL-682 505, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA SRI.T.V.VIJAYARAJAN SRI.M.SAJJAD RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E) KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MUHAMOOD T.T THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.34061 of 2006 -------------------------- Dated this the 23rd November,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner retired from service as a District Educational Officer. He entered service as High School Assistant in the Education Department on 19.1.1970. One Sri.Raveendran entered service as H.S.A on 5.8.1971 who is junior to the petitioner. He was drawing higher pay than the petitioner as evident from the details stated by the petitioner in paragraph 1 of the writ petition. The same is supported by pay slips Exts.P1 to P5. Even though the petitioner filed representations in the matter, they were not being considered at that point of time. Petitioner relies upon the judgment of this Court in Madhavan Assan Vs. Kerala SSI [1990 (2) KLT 871] and the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Kamala Devi Vs. Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd [2002 (1) KLT 157] in support of the plea made by him. This anomaly will result in arbitrariness. 2. Along with I.A No.14470 of 2009, petitioner has produced a Circular issued by the 1st respondent on W.P ( C) No.34061 of 2006 2 23.6.2009 in modification of the Circular No.59151/J2/2000/G.Edn dated 17.5.2002. It is clarified in Ext.P20 that the seniority list prepared and maintained by the management will be the criteria for rectifying junior senior anomaly with effect from the Pay Revision Order 1998. 3. Herein P6 and P8 are the impugned orders whereby the respondents have refused to rectify the anomaly. In Ext.P8 specific reference is made to Circular No.59151/J2/00/G.Edn dated 17.5.2002. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner's case can be reconsidered in the light of Ext.P20 since the basis of Ext.P8 order is only the circular dated 17.5.2002. 5. The said request is reasonable. In that view of the matter, Exts. P6 and P8 are quashed. There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider the matter in the light of Ext.P20 Circular No.26790/J2/07/G.Edn dated 23.6.2009 with notice to the petitioner and pass an order, in accordance with law, within a period of four months W.P ( C) No.34061 of 2006 3 from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In terms of the final orders thus passed, the benefits available to him will be disbursed without delay. Petitioner will file a comprehensive representation before the 1st respondent along with a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE ma W.P ( C) No.34061 of 2006 4 W.P ( C) No.34061 of 2006 5