IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2009 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 5320 of 2009(H) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- KAMALA G.K., D/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 40 YEARS, ASSISTANT TEACHER, B.K.NAIR MEMORIAL U.P.SCHOOL, P.O.KOZHUKKALLUR, MELADI SUB DISTRICT, KOZHIKODE - 673 524. RESIDING AT: GANAPATHYKANDY HOUSE, KOLLAM P.O., KOYILANDY VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN, MR.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MELADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. T.B. REMANI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.N.Ravindran, J. ================== W.P.(C) No.5320 of 2009 ===================== Dated this the 26th day of March, 2009. JUDGMENT Heard Smt. Latha Prabhakaran, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. T.B. Remani, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Upper Primary School Assistant (UPSA for short) in a private aided school on 2.6.1999. The said appointment was approved. The petitioner was retrenched from service due to fall in the student strength on 1.4.2003. When the petitioner was thrown out, she was drawing Rs.4290/- as basic pay in the scale of pay of Rs.4000-6090. The petitioner was reappointed as UPSA with effect from 1.6.2005. On such reappointment, applying Rule 52 of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules, her pay was fixed at Rs.4290/- in the scale of pay of Rs.4000-6090. After the petitioner was reappointed, the Government issued G.O.(P) No.145/06/Fin. dated 25.3.2006 revising the scales of pay of Government employees and aided school teachers with effect from 1.7.2004. The petitioner thereupon moved the Headmaster seeking refixation of pay. The Headmaster moved the Government and the Government by Ext.P4 order dated 27.5.2008 rejected the said request on the ground that since the petitioner was thrown out of service from 1.4.2003 to 31.5.2005 her WP(C) 5320/09 -: 2 :- request cannot be considered. The petitioner has aggrieved thereby moved the Government in Ext.P5 representation dated 17.9.2008 seeking a review of Ext.P4 order. Thereafter, this Writ Petition was filed seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the first respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation and pass orders thereon. 3. A reading of Ext.P4 indicates that the petitioner's claim for fixation of pay in the scale of pay of Rs.6680-10790 has been denied on the ground that on reappointment she has to be treated as a fresh employee. Rule 52(1) of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules states that teachers thrown out of service due to reduction in the number of posts shall on reappointment start on the same pay as they were getting at the time of relief, whether the new appointment is permanent or not. Rule 52 protects the pay of the retrenched teacher. After the petitioner was retrenched and before she was reappointed, the scales of pay of Government employees and aided school teachers were revised by G.O.(P) No.145/06/Fin. dated 25.3.2006 with effect from 1.7.2004. The petitioner was admittedly reappointed in service on 1.6.2005. Since the scale of pay of Rs.4000-6090 stood revised to Rs.6680-10790, such reappointment can only be in the said revised scale of pay. Therefore, I am prima facie satisfied that the Government should reconsider the matter, having regard to the purpose and intend underlying G.O.(P) No.145/06/Fin. dated 25.3.2006. In the result, I dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to the WP(C) 5320/09 -: 3 :- Government to consider the request made by the petitioner in Ext.P5 and take a decision thereon expeditiously and in any event within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The Government shall also afford the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. If the Government requires any clarification, the petitioner shall furnish the same. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess