IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2009 / 6TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 22037 of 2009(Y) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- P.K.BHASKARAN, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.P.KRISHNAN, PIDIKKAKUNDIL HOUSE, MAYANNOOR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT (WORKED AS LPSA IN KAU HIGH SCHOOL, VELLANIKARA, THRISSUR). BY MR.VARGHESE.J.PUNNACHALIL, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 3. THE REGISTRAR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, THRISSUR. 4. THE MANAGER, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOL, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. WP(C).No. 22037/2009 ...2... 6. THE DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY MR.K.P.MUJEEB, SC, KERALA AGRI UNIVERSITY FOR R2 TO R4 MR. A.J. VARGHESE, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.22037 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of August, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein retired from service as Lower Primary School Assistant, from the Kerala Agricultural University High School, Vellanikkara in Thrissur District. He was appointed as per Exhibit P1. His retirement was on 31.05.2007. He continued in service from 15.07.1981 to 31.05.2007. The petitioner was sanctioned pensionary benefits as per Exhibit P2. 2. The scale of pay granted to the petitioner even from the time of appointment was sought to be objected stating that the same sanctioned namely, Rs.390-685 is not in tune with the scale of pay of L.P.S.A in similar Government schools which was in a lower scale. So far, the D.C.R.G amount has also not been disbursed. Exhibit P3 is the decision taken by the University whereby they have taken the stand that the objections taken by the audit should be overruled. W.P.(C) No.22037/2009 2 3. The petitioner is relying upon Exhibit P4 judgment of this Court rendered in favour of a similarly placed teacher of the school. It was held by this Court that since the appointment and payment of salary are in tune with the relevant decisions of the University, there is no merit in the audit objection. There is nothing to show that the scale of pay of the L.P.S.A in the University school should be on par with the scale of pay of Teachers of Government Schools. It was held thus in paragraph 2 of Exhibit P4 judgment: “Ext.P1 is the order by which the petitioner was appointed pursuant to the selection conducted by the Selection Committee of the University. She was offered the appointment in a scale of pay of Rs.390- 685. It is evident that the appointment is as permitted by the University First Statute. It is also evident from the appointment order itself that the scale of pay is as fixed by the University. Obviously, that was not at par with the scale of pay applicable to similar posts in the Government Schools. There is nothing to show that the scale of pay of the LPSA in the University should be on a par with the scale of pay of Teachers of Government Schools. In that W.P.(C) No.22037/2009 3 view of the matter, the audit objection cannot survive”. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the University. It is submitted that the entire amount could not be disbursed in view of the audit objection. 5. In the light of the fact that the appointment made by the University is in terms of the First Statute and other regulations, there is no infirmity in the scale of pay that is offered to the petitioner at the time of appointment. They have granted the scale as fixed by them. There is nothing to show that the scale of pay of the L.P.S.A in the University school should be on par with the scale of pay of Teachers of Government Schools. Therefore, the audit objection cannot survive. The writ petition is allowed. Exhibit P2 to the extent it re- fixes the pay of the petitioner is quashed. There will be a direction to the respondents to grant pensionary benefits to the petitioner in terms of the order of appointment Exhibit P1 and the scale of pay which was revised from time to time. The pensionary benefits sanctioned as per Exhibit P2 will have to be W.P.(C) No.22037/2009 4 revised accordingly, and the due benefits will be disbursed to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp