Kerala High Court
Omana vs State Of Kerala on 4 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.603 OF 2016(A)
PETITIONER:
OMANA, AGED 50 YEARS, W/O.BALARAMAN,
PRABHU NIVAS, ASWARYA NAGAR, PUTHUNAGARAM
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PRESENTLY WORKING AS
HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (HINDI), MUSLIM HIGH
SCHOOL PUTHUNAGARAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA
SRI.H.PRAVEEN (KOTTARAKARA)
SMT.D.S.THUSHARA
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECERETARY TO
GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION (E) DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2 ACCONTANT GENERAL (AUDIT) KERALA
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
3 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
PALAKKAD 678 001.
SRI.P.M.MANOJ-SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
04.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.603 OF 2016(A)
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 4th day of March 2021
The petitioner, who is presently working as High School
Teacher in the "Muslim High School", Puthunagaram, submits
that, while she was working as a Lower Grade Hindi Teacher in
the year 2003, she availed Leave Without Allowance (LWA)
between the period from 17.11.2003 to 30.03.2004, which was
sanctioned as per Ext.P1. She says that since this period was,
thereafter, not reckoned for service benefits, she filed W.P.(C)
No.13865/2009 and obtained Ext.P2 judgment, wherein, it had
been affirmatively declared that she is entitled to obtain all
service benefits during the afore period, with a direction being
issued to the Government to pass consequential orders.
2. The petitioner says that in obedience thereto, the
Government issued Ext.P3 order, wherein, it has been
specifically stated that the period of LWA availed by the
petitioner for study purpose "will be counted for increment
and other service benefits". She says that even though Ext.P3
was issued as early as on 04.05.2010, it has not been
implemented until now and that she has been denied the
WP(C).No.603 OF 2016(A)
benefit of exercising reoption for obtaining the revised scale of
pay under the 2004 Pay Revision recommendations.
3. The petitioner contends that it is only because her
period of LWA has not been properly reckoned that she has
been denied this benefit; and that if this had been done, then
the Government could not have denied her request to exercise
reoption, as has been now done through Ext.P6 order dated
13.11.2015. The petitioner, therefore, prays that Ext.P6 be set
aside and that the respondents be directed to revise her pay
and increments in accordance with the Pay Revision,
reckoning the period of LWA as directed in Ext.P3.
4. When this matter was called today, Sri.Mohanakannan,
the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that his client
is retiring on 31.03.2021 and therefore, prayed that urgent
directions may be issued in this writ petition.
5. The learned Senior Government Pleader -
Sri.P.M.Manoj, conceded, to a pointed question of this Court,
that Ext.P6 does not say any reason as to why the petitioner's
request for reoption has been denied; and he submitted that if
this Court is so inclined, the Government is willing to
reconsider the matter and issue appropriate orders, taking
WP(C).No.603 OF 2016(A)
note of Ext.P3 order also.
6. When I examine Ext.P6, it is indubitable that the
petitioner's request for exercise of re-option has been declined
based on Government Order bearing GO(P)No.85/11/Fin.
Dated 26.02.2011, wherein, such a provision has not been
made. However, what is important in this case is that Ext.P3
order of the Government dated 04.05.2010, allows the period,
spent by the petitioner as LWA to be reckoned for all service
benefits and obviously therefore, her Pay Revision will also
have to be reckoned taking into account the said period. It is
only because this period has not been reckoned, that she has
not been able to make a re-option as per the aforementioned
Government order; and indubitably, therefore, Ext.P6, which
denies it for that reason, cannot obtain favour in law.
7. In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition
and set aside Ext.P6; with a resultant direction to the
competent Secretary of the Government to reconsider the
petitioner's request for re-option adverting to Ext.P2 judgment
of this Court as also Ext.P3 Government order issued resultant
thereto, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the
petitioner - either physically or through video conferencing -
WP(C).No.603 OF 2016(A)
thus culminating in an appropriate order thereon, as
expeditiously as is possible, but not later than the end of April,
2021.
Needless to say, pending the afore exercise, the
petitioner's pension papers shall be forwarded by the
Headmaster of the school to the competent Authorities and a
decision thereon will be taken, depending upon the resultant
order to be issued by the Government consequent to the afore
directions; and her pension and other benefits, including
increments shall also be disbursed without any further delay
thereafter.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
Stu JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO.5399/06/G.EDN.
DATED 12/12/2006
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10/12/2009 IN
WRIT PETITION 13865/2009.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(RT)1898/2010/G.EDN. DATED
4/5/2010.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
NO.B2/10808/2010 DATED 30/11/2010 SENT BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT TO THE HEAD MASTER OF THE
SCHOOL
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT LETTER
NO.4581/E1/2011/G.EDN. DATED 26/11/2011
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.28974 DATED
13/11/15.
