Kerala High Court
Aruna K.M. vs The State Of Kerala on 27 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 7TH MAGHA, 1942
WP(C).No.13940 OF 2020(N)
PETITIONER:
ARUNA K.M., AGED 54 YEARS
W/O BALARAMAN C, LPSA, KOZHUR UP SCHOOL,
ERUVATTY, KANNUR DISTRICT (RESIDING AT SREEPADHAM,
C.H. NAGAR, PULLIODE, KADIRUR, P.O.KANNUR-670 642).
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD
SRI.A.RENJIT
SRI.V.E.ABDUL GAFOOR
SRI.A.MOHAMMED SAVAD
SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF EDUCATION,
DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF THE DDE, CIVIL STATION, KANNUR 670 002.
4 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE AEO, THALASSERY NORTH, KERALA-670 101.
SRI P M MANOJ (SR GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
27.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 13940/20
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is stated to be
working as a Lower Primary School Teacher in
Kozhur U.P.School, Kannur, has approached this
Court impugning Ext.P4 order of the Government
which has denied her the benefit of exercising
re-option, solely because the time-frame
mentioned in the earlier Government Order had
expired.
2. The petitioner says that, as is clear
from Ext.P2 Government Order dated 23.06.2018,
opportunity had been afforded to all employees
to exercise re-option within a period of three
months and that the benefit of this was
intended to be made available to all employees
and directions had been given to complete the
pay fixation, as per the 2004-2009 Pay
Fixation Orders, at the earliest.
3. The petitioner says that however, an
objection was communicated to her as regards
WPC 13940/20
her 2009 pay fixation only on 23.01.2019 and
therefore, that Ext.P4 order, to the extent to
which it says that her request for exercise of
re-option is belated, cannot be found correct,
particularly on account of the specific
directions in Ext.P2 order, which was issued
on 23.06.2009.
4. The petitioner, therefore, prays that
Ext.P4 be set aside and the Government be
directed to reconsider her case, based on the
afore factual situation.
5. In response, Sri.P.M.Manoj - learned
Government Pleader, submitted that a counter
affidavit has been filed on record, wherein,
in paragraph 4 thereof, the following have
been averred:
4. Audit objection was communicated to
the petitioner only with effect from
23.01.2019. as per Annexure II Rule
7(3) of pay revision 2009 clearly
defines that pay revision cannot be
allowed to a date beyond
grade/promotion date. The promotion
date is 21.08.2009 and in no terms
the option for pay revision 2009 can
WPC 13940/20
be extended to a date after
21.08.2009. the petitioner got time
to opt the pay revision 2009 vide
GO(P)96/2018 the magnitude of the
loss can be minimized. The petitioner
submitted grievances to the State of
Kerala and the Government Secretary
vide order P3/307/2019 dated
30.06.2020 rejected the request for
re-option stating that the time limit
for filing a re-option as per
GO(P)96/2018 is elapsed.
He, therefore, prayed that this Writ
Petition be dismissed.
6. Even when I hear the learned Senior
Government Pleader as afore and examine the
afore extracted averments in the counter
affidavit, it is clear that the objection to
the petitioner's 2009 pay fixation was
communicated to her only on 23.01.2019.
However, the Government now takes the stand
that since her promotion is dated 21.08.2009,
the option for 2009 Pay Revision cannot be
extended to a date after 21.08.2009. But what
is relevant in this case is that Ext.P2 makes
it clear that the benefits of the Pay Fixation
had been made available to the employees
WPC 13940/20
through the Government Orders referred to as
1,2 and 3 therein and that the pay fixation
based on the 2004-2009 Pay Revision Orders had
been directed to be completed at the earliest.
However, pertinently, the petitioner was
communicated the audit objection against her
only on 23.01.2019 and I, therefore, fail to
understand how the Government can now take a
stand, through Ext.P4, that the exercise of
re-option is belated, going by the cut-off
date of 21.08.2009 fixed earlier.
7. Obviously, the reason why the
petitioner could not exercise her re-option
within the afore time was because no audit
objection had been communicated to her until
23.01.2019 and consequently, she could have
exercised such re-option only thereafter.
In the afore circumstances, I have no
doubt that Ext.P4 cannot find favour in law
and therefore, quash the same; with a
WPC 13940/20
resultant direction to the Secretary of
Government to reconsider the petitioner's
claim based on her request for exercise of re-
option, adverting to Ext.P2 order and issue
appropriate orders thereon, after affording
her an opportunity of being heard - either
physically or through videoconferencing - as
expeditiously as is possible, but not later
than two months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
RR JUDGE
WPC 13940/20
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGE OF AUDIT
PARA FORWARDED BY THE ASSISTANT
EDUCATIONAL OFFICER THALASSERY NORTH
(WITH RELEVANT PAGE)
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO 58/2018/FIN
DATED 23.6.2018
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY APPLICATION DATED
19.2.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT LETTER NO
P3/307/2019/G.EDN DATED 3.6.2020
