IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2010 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36212 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHEELA P.PETER, W/O.BENNY, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT, N.M.H.S.S., THIRUNAVAYA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PAULSON THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTNAPURAM 695 001. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM 685 002. 3. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUR 685 006. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.36212 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as H.S.A. at N.M.H.S.S., Thirunavaya, Malappuram District. It is stated that she was originally appointed as U.P.S.A. with effect from 1.6.1989 and thereafter, she was promoted as H.S.A. with effect from 7.10.1994. The petitioner was granted Higher Grade with effect from 7.10.2004. Pursuant to the pay revision order of 2006, the pay of the petitioner was fixed as per Exhibit P1. The District Educational Officer sanctioned the same accepting the option made by the petitioner with effect from 7.10.2005. Subsequently in March 2010, the Deputy Director of Education objected to Exhibit P1 fixation of pay sanctioned by the District Educational Officer and issued Exhibit P2 objection. The relevant portion of Exhibit P2 reads as follows : “3. Sheeba.P.Peter, H.S.A. (SS) : She was granted higher grade in HSA Cadre from 7.10.2004 in the pre revised WPC No.36212/2010 2 scale of pay of Rs.5000-8150. Thus she is not eligible for opt a date on or after 7.10.2004 as per Rule 7 of annexure II of GO(P) 145/06/Fin dated 15.3.2006. But she exercised by her is treated to be invalid, her pay is to be revised and fixed as on 1.7.2004 and then refixed as on 7.10.2004. Then she will be eligible for Rs.9,590/- (8390-13270) on 1.7.2004 and Rs.10,070/- on 7.10.2004 (9590-16650) and Rs.10,310/- on 1.10.2005. But pay is seen fixed at Rs.10,790/- on 7.10.2005. Excess amount drawn from 7.10.2005 onwards is to be got refunded.” 2. It is submitted by the petitioner that Exhibit P2 objection is not legal and proper and it is contrary to G.O.(P) No.405/06(16)Fin. dated 7.10.2006 (Exhibit P3). Pointing out the objections to Exhibit P2, the petitioner submitted Exhibit P6 representation dated 5.10.2010 to the first respondent. Exhibit P6 is pending disposal. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if WPC No.36212/2010 3 Exhibit P2 objection is accepted, the net result would be the junior of the petitioner would be getting a higher salary than that of the petitioner with effect from 26.7.2005. 3. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following : “(i) declare that the petitioner is entitled for stepping up of her pay equal to that of her junior with effect from 26.7.2005, the date on which the junior has drawn higher pay, in the light of Exhibit P3 enabling order. (ii) issue a writ of mandamus or direction directing the respondents to revise the pay of the petitioner equalising the same with that of her junior with effect from 26.7.2005, as provided in Exhibit P3 Government Order. (iii) issue a writ of certiorari quashing Exhibit P2 audit objection in so far as it concerns the petitioner. WPC No.36212/2010 4 (iv) issue appropriate directions to the Government to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P6 representation after hearing the petitioner within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court.” 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the time being, it would be sufficient, if Exhibit P6 is considered and disposed of expeditiously, keeping in abeyance the proceedings for recovery of any amount from the petitioner pursuant to the objection. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows : (i) The first respondent shall consider and dispose of WPC No.36212/2010 5 Exhibit P6 representation submitted by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. (ii) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. (iii) Till Exhibit P6 is disposed of, all further proceedings for recovery of any amount allegedly drawn by the petitioner as excess salary shall be kept in abeyance. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl