IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2010 / 20TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 17437 of 2008(A) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ B.SATHEESAN, JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT, O/O THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, INVESTIGATION AND PLANNING CIRCLE, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHIEF ENGINEER, (IRRIGATION & ADMINISTRATION)IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, O/O THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, INVESTIGATION & PLANNING CIRCLE, THRISSUR. 4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD MECHANICAL DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD MECHANICAL SUB DIVISION, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 6. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL OF KERALA (A & E), O/O THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.N.SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/10/2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.17437/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING G.O.(RT) NO.907/93/IWN DT. 17.8.1993. P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING G.O.(RT) NO.1787/97/IRN DTD. 31.12.1997. P3:- COPY OF THE STATEMENT DTD. 24.9.2004,. P4:- COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O.(RT) NO.1336/04 DTD. 12.11.2004. P5:- COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY the 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT. P5(a):- COPY OF THE PARA III OF AUDIT OBJECTION. P6:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 30.8.2006. P7:- COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMTITED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT DTD. 27.1.07. P8:- COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 31.01.2007. P9:- COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY the 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE IST RESPONDENT. P10:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEARING NO.WS-1/399 DTD. 4.1.2008. P11:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P12:- COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.45/02/FIN. DTD. 19.6.02. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 17437 of 2008-A - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of October, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as a Junior Superintendent in the Office of the third respondent. The challenge is against the proceedings culminating in Ext.P5(a), P10 and P11. The petitioner seeks for a further declaration that he is entitled for second higher grade with effect from 8.3.1997 and that he is not liable to refund the salary drawn by him on the basis of the fixation of second higher grade. 2. The facts of the case show that the petitioner had filed an application for leave without allowance on 13.7.1992 for taking up another employment within the State. That was sanctioned as per Ext.P1, but even prior to that he had joined the new employer. Even though an application was submitted for extension of leave, that was not granted. Ultimately he submitted an application on 15.5.1996 seeking permission for rejoining duty. Finally, sanction was granted as per Ext.P2 order dated 31.12.1997. 3. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for unauthorised absence from 14.12.1992 to 16.8.1993. That culminated in an order barring an increment for one year without cumulative effect. wpc 17437/2008 2 Thereafter, the petitioner approached the second respondent to regularise his service from 28.1.1993 to 16.8.1993 and from 17.8.1995 to 31.12.1997 by granting eligible leave for the said period. The petitioner approached this Court also by filing W.P.(C) No.19682/2004 for appropriate directions and in compliance of the directions issued by this Court, Ext.P4 Govt. Order was issued, according to which, the period of absence from 28.1.1993 to 16.8.1993 and from 17.8.1995 to 31.12.1997 was regularised as non-duty without forfeiture of past service. On completion of 8 years service, he was granted higher grade on 8.3.1997. Nine years thereafter, the 6th respondent has raised an audit objection against sanctioning of the higher grade. It resulted in Ext.P5(a) report. Even though objections were filed to drop the same, finally Ext.P10 order was passed refixing the pay of the petitioner and further computing the alleged excess amount drawn by him. Even though the petitioner again approached the second respondent, the second respondent directed to refund the same. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the various proceedings will show that the higher grade granted could not have been objected to. Learned Govt. Pleader submitted that the objection raised was perfectly justified. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be allowed to move the Government by filing a proper representation wpc 17437/2008 3 against the proceedings impugned. If an appropriate representation is filed within a period of three weeks, the same will be entertained and appropriate orders will be passed after hearing the petitioner within a period of four months thereafter. 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. The interim order passed by this Court staying recovery will continue till orders are passed. It is made clear that I have not expressed anything on the merits of the matter. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/