IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 34080 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, DRAFTSMAN GRADE-I (RTD),TECHNICAL HIGH SCHOOL, CHARUVATHUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH SRI.MOHAMMED SHAMEEL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUPERINTENDENT, TECHNICAL HIGH SCHOOL, CHERUVATHUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. A.J. VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.34080/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Being a Draftsman Grd.I petitioner was given the scale of pay of Rs.2060-3200, by Ext.P4 order, which is equivalent to that of Assistant Lecturer. By Ext.P8, the second respondent refused to ratify the same, holding the view that the petitioner was eligible only the scale of pay of Rs.1640-2900 and it was also ordered that the excess amount paid will be recovered. 2. Though the petitioner represented against that order, he was unsuccessful and finally, he approached this court by filing O.P.No.28208/00. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P10 judgment directing disposal of Ext.P9 keeping in abeyance the recovery that was ordered. The representation was finally rejected by Ext.P11. Following WP(c).No.34080/08 2 Ext.P11 his pay was also revised. Thereafter, relying on Ext.P13 Government order dated 21.3.1972, by which, according to the petitioner, the Government recognized Diploma as an alternate qualification for the post of Assistant Lecturer petitioner approached this court once again by filing WP(c).No.25080/01. During the pendency of that writ petition, petitioner retired from service on 30.6.2005. 3. That writ petition was finally disposed of by Ext.P14 judgment. In that judgment it was ordered that the Government shall reconsider Ext.P11, and also consider the claim of the petitioner on the basis of Ext.P13 Government Order referred to above, which was produced as Ext.P16 in that writ petition. Accordingly, the Government reconsidered the matter and issued Ext.P15 declining the prayer sought for. It is challenging Ext.P15 and praying for consequential reliefs this writ petition has been filed. WP(c).No.34080/08 3 4. A reading of Ext.P15 shows that the Government have not even referred to Ext.P13 Government Order and therefore the said order is one passed contrary to the directions of this court in Ext.P14 judgment. For that reason itself, Ext.P15 order deserves to be set aside and I do so. It is ordered that the claim of the petitioner raised in Ext.P9 shall be reconsidered by the Government, taking note of Ext.P13 Government Order referred to above and as directed by this court in Ext.P14 judgment. Orders as above shall be passed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 8 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. In the meanwhile, the second respondent is directed that the admitted amount of DCRG due to the petitioner for the service that she had rendered, shall be released within 4 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. WP(c).No.34080/08 4 Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a coy of the writ petition before the respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. WP(c).No.34080/08 5