IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2009 / 21ST ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 13201 of 2006(V) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.SARASWATHY AMMA, W/O.LATE.V.SASIDHARAN VADAKKUM MUKKIL HOUSE, THURUTH, ALUVA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MAIN CAMPUS, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MAIN CAMPUS, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.K.P.MUJEEB, SC, AGRL.UNTY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.13201/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GA/31167/B/81/D.DIS. DTD. 30.5.81 ISSUED BY R1. P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GA/31231/B1/81 DTD. 15.7.81 ISSUED BY R1. P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GA/B1/27066/93.D.DIS DTD. 31.10.96 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GA/L3/14287/2003 DTD. 29.12.03 OF R1. P5:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 4.2.05 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER. P6:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTAION DTD. 12.10.04 SUBMITTED BEFORE R2. P7:- COPY OF THE REMINDER DTD. 9.1.06 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 13201 of 2006-V - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of October, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner is the widow of late Sasidharan who died on 5.7.2002. He was appointed as Teacher in the school under the Kerala Agricultural University in the pay scale of Rs.390-685 as per the decision of the Executive Committee meeting of the University dated 30.5.1981. The same has been produced as Ext.P1. The petitioner's husband was placed under suspension by the University, but later by proceedings dated 1.1.2000 he was reinstated in service. The respondents had paid an amount of Rs.32,105/- as subsistence allowance. The same was sought to be recovered from the terminal benefits payable to the petitioner, on the basis of audit objection. The petitioner filed Ext.P4 representation seeking to waive the audit objection. Later, by Ext.P5 the petitioner was required to remit the amount. Reliance is placed on the audit objection in Ext.P5 also. Further representations were filed as Exts.P6 and P7 and since no action was taken by the respondents, this writ petition is filed seeking for appropriate directions in the matter. 2. The third respondent has filed a counter affidavit. In the counter wpc 13201/2006 2 affidavit, the stand taken is that even though the pay of the deceased was fixed at Rs.477/- in the scale of pay of Rs.390-685, the then scale of pay of school teachers (LPSA) was Rs.340-535 in Government and aided school service. Accordingly, his pay was to be fixed at Rs.465/- with effect from 22.8.1981. This point was considered by the audit while fixing the pensionary benefits. It is also stated that the action taken by the University not to recover the excess amount of subsistence allowance is also not correct. 3. It is evident from Ext.P1 that the late husband of the petitioner was appointed on a specific scale of pay as per the decision of the Executive Committee . It is clear from the proceedings that the Executive Committee at that point of time, fixed the scale of pay at Rs.390-685. The objection taken by the audit that it is not at par with the scale of pay applicable to teachers in Government schools, cannot be sustained. The University being an autonomous body, is entitled to fix their own scale of pay. At no point of time, there was any decision to the effect that the same scale of pay should be adopted. Therefore, the refixation of pay with effect from the date of Ext.P1 cannot be sustained. 4. As regards the subsistence allowance that was paid to the deceased, by Ext.P4 the University decided to waive the recovery of wpc 13201/2006 3 subsistence allowance. When the University itself has taken a conscious decision not to recover the amount of subsistence allowance, the audit cannot sit in appeal over the same. Reference may be made to the decision of this court in Usuvathunnisa v. Asst. Educational Officer (1990 (2) KLT 530), wherein this court has held that the audit objection cannot result in nullifying the orders passed by competent authorities. Herein, evidently the University has taken a decision to waive the recovery of subsistence allowance. Therefore, the objection taken by the audit in that regard also cannot be sustained. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. It is declared that the deceased husband of the petitioner is entitled for the scale of pay sanctioned as per Ext.P1, subject to further revision from time to time and accordingly, the pensionary benefits will have to be refixed and disbursed to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. There will be a further direction not to recover the amount of Rs.32,105/- disbursed as subsistence allowance to the deceased husband of the petitioner. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) wpc 13201/2006 4 kav/