IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2008 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 29309 of 2006(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ J.S.GEETHA, H.S.A., S.K.V. HIGH SCHOOL, NANNIYODU, PACHA P.O. RESIDING AT MELODY, HILL TOP GARDEN, VAZHAYILA, KARAKULAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE, OFFICE OF THE D.E.O, ATTINGAL P.O., ATTINGAL. 4. THE HEAD MISTRESS, S.K.V. HIGH SCHOOL, NANNIYODU, PACHA P.O. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 29309/2006/L APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1: COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO 365/05 FIN. DT: 6-08-2005. EXT. P2: COPY OF THE OPTION DECLARATION. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE JP S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ======================= W.P.(C) No. 29309 of 2006 (L) ======================= Dated this the 31st day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner failed to exercise her revised option for the revised scale of pay as per the 1997 pay revision order within time. By Ext.P1 order dated 6.8.2005, Government granted further time for exercising re-option till the end of October 2005. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted her re-option on 27.10.05. However, her revised option has not been accepted, is the complaint raised by the petitioner in the writ petition. In view of certain discrepancies in the date of submission of re-option, I directed the Government Pleader to direct the 3rd respondent to ascertain from the 4th respondent as to when exactly the petitioner has exercised her re-option. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that although the petitioner had submitted the option within time, it was returned for curing certain defects therein and after curing the defects it was submitted only beyond the date of last date prescribed. 2. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I W.P.(C) No. 29309/2006/L -2- feel that a lenient attitude can be taken in the matter in so far as the petitioner had submitted her option, even though defective, within the time prescribed. Therefore, I direct the competent among respondents 1 to 3 to accept Ext.P2 option of the petitioner as one filed within the time limit prescribed by Ext.P1 and process the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE jp