IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1931 OP.No. 24451 of 2001(J) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.V. SANTHADEVI ANTHARJANAM, W/O. VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 58 YEARS, KUNNATH MANA, `SOORYAKANTHI', SANTHINAGAR, THIRUVAMBADY, THRISSUR DT. BY ADV.MR.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECCRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF INSURANCE MEDICAL SERVICES, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. INSURANCE MEDICAL OFFICER, E.S.I.T.B. HOSPITAL, MULAMKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR DT. 4. INSURANCE MEDICAL OFFICER, E.S.I. HOSPITAL, THRISSUR. 5. THE AUDIT OFFICER, AUDIT GENERAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER (FINANCE) MR. MANOJ KUMAR. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P. NO. 24451/2001-J: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE G.O. DTD. 10/02/1992. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DTD. 22/06/1994. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE R.5. DTD. 31/07/1991. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 02/06/1997. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 12/06/1997. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE G.O.NO.615/138 DTD. 28/06/1997. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 10/11/1997. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.1. DTD. 02/12/1997. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 18/12/1997. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 18/05/1988 TO THE R.1. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE R.2. DTD. 18/05/1998. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR, INSURANCE MEDICAL SERVICE. EXT.P.14: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. EXT.P.15: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= O.P. No. 24451 of 2001 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 20th November, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner entered service of the Health Department of Government of Kerala on 2-3-1968. Subsequently, in 1985, the Health Department was bifurcated into Health Department and Insurance Medical Service Department. The petitioner opted for the Insurance Medical Service Department. The petitioner completed 13 years on 23-8-1982 and became entitled to first higher grade. She completed 20 years on 1-11-1989 and became entitled to the second higher grade. She completed 25 years of service on 2-3-1993 and became entitled to the third higher grade. She retired on 28-2-1998. Pursuant to pay revision order of 1992 with effect from 1-7-1992, the petitioner submitted her option for pay revision on the basis of which pay of the petitioner was fixed. By Government Order dated 5-12-1995, the Government employees were given a chance for re-option within six months from the date of the Government Order. Therein, in cases of persons becoming entitled to higher grade, there was a stipulation that option shall be as on the date of the higher grade. However, the petitioner submitted re-option for 1-7-1993. Since her date of higher grade was 2-3-1993, the same was not accepted. Subsequently, by Government Order dated 28-6-1997, Government permitted to opt time bound higher grade on the date of their choice and to continue in the pre-revised scale till the date of option. But that option had to be filed within three months from the date of the Government Order. On the ground that the petitioner had already filed an option for 1-7- 1993, the petitioner did not file any re-option. This resulted in Ext. P12, P13 and P14 orders, whereby the benefit of option date 1-7-1993 was denied to the petitioner on the ground that she had not filed a fresh option pursuant to the Government Order dated 28-6-1997 within the time fixed in that notification. The petitioner challenges O.P. No. 24451/2001 -: 2 :- the impugned orders. The petitioner also seeks re-option in respect of 1983 and 1988 pay revisions also. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “(i) Call for the records leading to Exts. P13, P14 and P15 and issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Exts. P13, P14 & P15. (ii) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondents 1, 2 and 5 to accept the re-option filed by the petitioner, treating the re-option filed by the petitioner as valid in view of Ext. P6. (iii) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondents to pay off the salary of the petitioner for the period from September, 1995 till March, 1997. (iv) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to refund Rs. 10,628/- and Rs. 3,884/- illegally recovered from the petitioner with interest; (v) issue an interim direction, directing the 2nd respondent to clarify the position as to re-option as requested by the 5th respondent in Ext. P 3 and refix the pay due to the petitioner at the time of re-option, with effect from 1.7.1986 pending disposal of this original petition.” 2. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit supporting the impugned orders on the ground that the petitioner had not submitted her re-option pursuant to Government Order dated 28-6-1997 within three months' time granted. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. I am of opinion that the objection against the petitioner's claim is purely technical in nature. The petitioner had earlier filed her option for 1-7-1993 at a time when she ought to have submitted the option for 2-3-1993, which was her date of third higher grade. That was not finalised at the time when Government Order dated 28- 6-1997 was issued. Therefore, there is nothing wrong in allowing the O.P. No. 24451/2001 -: 3 :- petitioner to have her pay fixed in accordance with the date of option as 1-7-1993 giving the petitioner the benefit of the Government Order dated 28-6-1997. Therefore, in that respect, the petitioner is entitled to succeed. However, regarding the reliefs in respect of 1983 and 1988 pay revisions, I do not think that at this point of time, the petitioner is entitled to the reliefs prayed for. Accordingly, the impugned orders are quashed to the extent of rejection the petitioner's option date for third higher grade as 1-7- 1993. The respondents are directed to re-fix the petitioner's pay for the third higher grade with the option date as 1-7-1993 and pass appropriate orders pursuant thereto as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner would be entitled to all consequential monetary benefits thereof. The original petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/