IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2009 / 15TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2235 of 2007(N) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- BABY. C.J., HEAD MASTER, M.U.A.L.P.S., PAVARATTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.C.X.ANTONY BENEDICT RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THRISSUR. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MULLASSERRI P.O., PAVARATTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, M.U.A.L.P.S., THRISSUR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.DILIP MOHAN FOR R BY ADV.MR.PRADEEP KRISHNA FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.2235/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DT. 15.6.98 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. P2:- COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF PAY FIXATION OF THE PETITIONER WITH EFFECT FROM 15.6.98. P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 20.6.2000 ISSEUD BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ATTACHING THE AUDIT OBJECTIN OF MUALPS, PAVARATTY. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 26.3.01 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF RS. 6450/-. P6:- COPY OF THE CHALAN RECEIPT SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF RS. 2,680/-. P7:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 15.5.01 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P8:- COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2004(3) KLT 206 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P9:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 16.8.06 IN WPC. NO.473/06 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE TSS S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 2235 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 6th July, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was appointed as a L.P.S.A in the M.U.A.L.P.S, Pavaratty on 15-6-1983. When a vacancy of Headmaster arose in the school on 1-4-1997, since there were no qualified hands for promotion, the senior-most LPSA, Smt. P.A. Mallika was appointed as a temporary Headmistress under Rule 45C of Chapter XIV-A of the K.E.R. Subsequently, the said Smt. P.A. Mallika relinquished her appointment as temporary Headmistress consequent to which the petitioner was appointed as temporary Headmaster under Rule 45C of Chapter XIV-A of K.E.R with effect from 1-6-1998. The petitioner's pay was fixed in the Headmaster's scale of pay. Subsequently, by Ext. P3, an audit objection regarding the fixation was forwarded to the petitioner by the A.E.O seeking his objections to the same. After considering the matter, by Ext. P4 dated 26-3-2001, the petitioner was directed to refund the excess pay of Rs.4,600/- with effect from 15-6- 1998 and Rs. 4,700/- with effect from 1-7-1998. The petitioner paid the amount as per Exts. P5 and P6. Subsequently, after considering the petitioner's objections, Ext. P7 order was passed confirming the recovery. The petitioner is challenging the same. 2. According to the petitioner, the issue is squarely covered by Exts.P8 and P9 judgments, wherein it has been held that for the purpose of fixation of pay of a temporary Headmaster appointed under Rule 45C, the question of passing test qualification, which is the objection raised in the impugned orders, is not a relevant factor. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “(a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Exts.P3, P4 and P7 and quashing the same. (b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, W.P.C. No. 2235/2007 -: 2 :- order or direction directing respondents 1 and 2 to fix the pay of the petitioner in the Head Master's scale of pay of Rs.1640-2900 at Rs. 1640/- with effect from 15-6-1998 and grant the increment due to the petitioner. (c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 and 2 to give fixation of pay to the petitioner in the Head Master's scale of pay with effect from 15-6-1998 and disburse all consequential benefits including arrears of salary.” 2. The learned Government Pleader points out that Ext. P3 by which the A.E.O forwarded the audit objection is dated 20-6-2000, Ext. P4 by which the petitioner was directed to refund the amount is dated 16-3-2001 and Ext. P7 by which the demand was confirmed is dated 15-5-2001. According to the learned Government Pleader, having filed the writ petition only on 18-1-2007, the petitioner is guilty of delay and laches and for that reason alone, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. In view of the formidable objection raised by the the learned Government Pleader, I am not inclined to consider the writ petition on merits. The petitioner had refunded the amount demanded in 2003. The petitioner has filed this writ petition only on 18-1-2007. The judgments relied on by the petitioner came into existence even in 2004 and 2006. The petitioner has not offered any plausible explanation for the long delay of four years in approaching this Court. The petitioner is therefore guilty of unexplained delay and laches for which alone the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. In view of the W.P.C. No. 2235/2007 -: 3 :- same, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/