IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13292 of 2011(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.D.RAJAPPAN, FIELD ASSISTANT - RETIRED FROM PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LIMITED, RESIDING AT PUTHENPARAMBIL, T.C.NO.19/844, MUDAVANMUGAL, POOJAPURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 12. BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN, SRI.R.REJI, SMT.THARA THAMBAN, SRI.B.BIPIN, SMT.REVATHY P.NAIR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, REGISTRERED OFFICE, KOTTAYAM - 686 004. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS, SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN, SRI.BINU MATHEW, SRI.TERRY V.JAMES, SRI.B.J.JOHN PRAKASH, SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL), R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. NISHA BOSE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 13292 Of 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF JUNE, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired from the service of the Plantation Corporation of Kerala as a Field Executive on 31.8.2005. The petitioner's grievance is that the option exercised for the pay revision which was given retrospective effect from 1.7.1998 has not been accepted so far and the benefits have not been granted. 2. It is pointed out in the Writ Petition that the pay revision of the year 2006 was implemented by Exhibit P1 Government Order and it is with retrospective effect from 1.7.1998 with notional fixation from that date and monetary benefits from 1.4.2001. It is the case of the petitioner that he had never received any intimation from the Corporation at any time with regard to the procedure for submitting the option. Only when his juniors obtained scales at a higher stage, he became aware of the matter and he has already filed a representation as per Exhibit P2 seeking to grant the benefits and the option statement is also produced as Exhibit P3. W.P.(C)No.13292/11 -2- 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation. 4. In the light of the fact that a representation is pending before the 1st respondent, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take a decision on Exhibits P2 and P3 and communicate the decision to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The contention raised by the petitioner that he was not served with any notice to submit the option will also be taken into consideration. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-( T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) dsn True copy P.A.to Judge