IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2009 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 6563 of 2004(F) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- L.R.ARUNADEVI, LECTURER IN MEDICO SOCIOLOGY, MEDICAL COLLEGE, THRISSUR. BY ADVS.MR.T.A.SHAJI SMT.T.K.PRASEEDA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), O/O. THE A.G., KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER, THRISSUR. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE (B) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.MUHAMOOD T.T. FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO.6563/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 31.10.97 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.145/2000/H&FWD DT. 16.6.2000 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. P3:- COPY OF THE PAY IN SLIP DT. 15.12.2003 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.6563/2004-F ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 16th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the issuance of Ext.P3 pay slip seeking to revise her pay and to effect recovery of excess salary paid. The petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Medico Sociology in the Medical College, Thrissur. She was initially appointed as Social Scientist on 24/09/1992. The petitioner is a post graduate in Sociology. She was eligible to be promoted as Lecturer in Medico Sociology. When a vacancy arose in the post of Lecturer in Medico Sociology, as per Ext.P1 order the petitioner was provisionally promoted to the said post and, she joined duty on 03/11/1997, and is continuing as such. The petitioner was also included by the D.P.C in the select list published on 29/12/1998. She was accordingly appointed as regular appointee also. 2. By Ext.P2, the pay scales were revised in respect of teaching staff of Medical, Dental and Pharmaceutical Sciences Colleges in the State with effect from 01/01/1996. The petitioner exercised the option as provided under Clause XVII of Ext.P2. The option submitted by the petitioner was accepted. Accordingly, the pay slip was issued with effect W.P.(C). No.6563/2004 -:2:- from 03/11/1997. Annual increments were also granted which became due on 01/11/1998, 01/11/1999 and 01/11/2000. The third respondent has granted subsequent increments in the same scale of pay. On 01/11/2003, the petitioner was granted the sixth increment. It is at this stage, Ext.P3 was issued. The same is challenged on various grounds in the writ petition. 3. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the fourth respondent various circumstances have been pointed out to justify issuance of Ext.P3. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter is covered in favour of the petitioner by the judgment of a learned Single Judge in W.P.(C).No.2233/2004. The similar question arose for consideration therein. This Court, after considering the various aspects, held in paragraph (5) as follows:- “On a plain reading of Ext.P1 it is clear that it is applicable to teachers whether medical or non-medical or otherwise in Medical, Dental and Pharmaceutical Science Colleges. Paragraph 2 of Ext.P1 reads that the Government ordered the revision of scales of pay and allowances of the teaching staff of the Medical, Dental and Pharmaceutical Science Colleges in the State with W.P.(C). No.6563/2004 -:3:- effect from 01/01/1996 as shown in the Annexure to this order. In each and every part of Ext.P1 it is unambiguously made clear that the Government Order is applicable to all teaching staff to the Medical Dental and Pharmaceutical Science Colleges, irrespective of whether they belong to clinical or non-clinical group. In Annexure to Ext.P1 it is again stated that the revision applied to the teaching staff of the Medical, Dental and Pharmacy Colleges in Kerala.” 5. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P3 is quashed. The petitioner will be free to raise any other grievances regarding the carrier advancements or the like before the second respondent by way of a representation and, if such a representation is filed, the same also will be considered in accordance with law and appropriate orders will be passed expeditiously. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms