IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2010 / 5TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35806 of 2004(K) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. K.RAJAN NAIR, `ROHINI', S.N.PURAM, VADASSERYKONAM P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. A.R.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SINDHUBHAVAN, SOUTH KARUVATTA, KARUVATTA P.O., ALLEPPEY-690 517. 3. P.SASIDHARAN, `VIJITHRA', PADINJARE KARA, VAIKOM P.O., PIN-686 146. 4. P.PRABALAN, `CHITHRALEKHA', KALLIYOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. R.THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI, `AISWARYA', KUNNATHUR EAST, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 6. K.P.BHASKARAN NAIR, `ARUNIMA', MADIYOOR, KALPETTA P.O., WAYANAD-673 121. BY ADV. SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT.VEENA.B.KUMAR SMT.T.B.REMANI SMT.LEKSHMY RAMANATHAN SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI SRI.T.R.RAJESH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.35806/04 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DT. 21.7.2000 IN OP NO.8846/1989. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 3.11.2003 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 8.1.2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 9.7.2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 31.7.2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6. COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DT. 3.8.2004 IN CCC NO.631 OF 2004. EXT.P7. COPY OF THE G.O.(Rt)No.3294/2004/RD DT.3.9.2004. EXT.P8. COPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER DT. 12.10.2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P9. COPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER DT. 25.9.2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P10. COPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER DT. 12.10.2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH PETITIONER. EXT.P11. COPY OF THE G.O.(P)No.545/2001/(98)/Fin. DT. 19.3.2001. EXT.P12. COPY OF THE ORDER DT.18.7.2002 IN CCC NO.730 OF 2001. EXT.P13. COPY OF THE ORDER DT.25.6.2002 IN CCC NO.730 OF 2001. EXT.P14. COPY OF THE ORDER DT.24.6.2001 IN CCC NO.730 OF 2001. EXT.P15. COPY OF THE G.O.(P)No.1016/2000/Fin. DT. 12.7.2000. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 35806 OF 2004 -------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioners entered service as IInd Grade Surveyors. They were promoted to the post of Head Surveyors on various dates. Petitioners 1 to 6 were further promoted to the post of Superintendent and all the petitioners retired from service subsequently. 2. A revised gradation list was prepared on 12.10.1989. Based on the revised gradation list, some of the petitioners were ordered to be reverted. O.P. Nos.8846 of 1989 was filed by petitioners 1 to 3, O.P.No.9979 of 1989 was filed by petitioners 4 & 5 and O.P.No.2407 of 1992 was filed by the sixth petitioner. 3. By Ext.P1 common judgment, the original petitions were allowed with costs. Ext.P5 is the one of the consequential order issued stating that the incumbent promoted notionally are entitled to all monetary benefits with retrospective effect. Thereafter when the petitioners exercised re-option in the respective cadre , re-option was allowed by Ext.P7 order. However the acceptance for re-option for the subsequent pay revisions after their retrospective promotion WPC No.35806/04 2 was subjected to the conditions that the benefit of re-option will be limited to pensionary claims and that neither excess need be refunded nor arrears will be paid. Representations made by the petitioners against the aforesaid conditions were rejected by Exts.P8, P9 and P10. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed. 4. The reason stated in Exts.P8 to P10 is that in all cases of re-option permitted to serving employees, arrears of pay are admissible only from the date of filing the re-option and that in case of retired persons re-option, if permitted, will only be for pensionary claims and they are not eligible for arrears of pay consequent to re- option. 5. In my view, this reason is not appealing in the facts of this case. This is for the reason that petitioners could exercise re- option only after they secured Ext.P1 judgment and the consequential orders issued. Therefore re-option was not possible prior to their retirement. If that be so, the reason stated in Exts.P8 to P10 for denying the benefits that in case of re-option exercised by retired employees, benefit will be limited to pensionary claims only and that arrears of pay will not be paid cannot be accepted. WPC No.35806/04 3 Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition quashing the condition Nos. 1 and 2 of Ext.P7 order and Exts.P8 to P10 and directing that the petitioners be disbursed monetary benefits due to them pursuant to the re-option exercised by them, without enforcing the conditions imposed in Ext.P7 order. Consequent monetary benefits shall be disbursed to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC (JUDGE) vps WPC No.35806/04 4 WPC No.35806/04 5