Kerala High Court
Seetha T.K vs State Of Kerala on 25 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 2852 OF 2020
PETITIONER/S:
SEETHA T.K.
AGED 65 YEARS
HEADMISTRESS (RETIRED),
KUNHIPPALLY MOPLA L.P. SCHOOL, THALAYI, THALAYI.P.O.,
THALASSERRY, KANNUR DISTRICT-670102,
RESIDING AT 'SRUTHI', VADIKKAL, P.O.
TEMPLE GATE, KANNUR DISTRICT-670102.
BY ADV P.M.PAREETH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
THALASSERRY SOUTH, KANNUR-670102.
3 HEADMASTER,
KUNHIPPALLY MOPLA.L.P.SCHOOL,
THALAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT-670102.
4 ACCOUNTANT GENERAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
5 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
KANNUR-670102.
BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI PREMCHAND R NAIR SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 2852 OF 2020
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner contends that she was appointed as LPSA on 14.07.1983
and while continuing as such, she was promoted as Head Mistress of the school
with effect from 12.08.1994. While working as such, she attained superannuation
on 30.04.2008. At the time of attaining superannuation, the higher grade due to
the petitioner on completion of 10 years of service in the post of Headmistress
was not granted. In the said circumstances, she approached the 2nd respondent
and filed a representation seeking grant of higher grade. When no action was
taken, the petitioner approached this Court and filed W.P.(C.) No. 26404/2018. By
Exhibit P1 judgment, this Court issued directions to the AEO to take a decision,
and in terms of the same, Ext.P2 order was issued. The pay due to the petitioner
was refixed at Rs.12,590/- with effect from 12.8.2004, and increments were
authorised raising the pay to Rs.13,610/- in a higher pay band as on 1.8.2007. It
is contended that the pensionary benefits have been sanctioned on the basis of
the pre-revised pay of Rs.12,930/-, that too, on a lower pay band. The petitioner
contends that in view of the refixation of pay and grant of higher increments, the
pensionary benefits are also to be refixed. In the said circumstances, the
petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation before the 2nd respondent. However,
the request was rejected by Ext.P5 order.
WP(C) NO. 2852 OF 2020
2. The petitioner contends that the 2nd respondent has issued orders
granting Higher Grade to the petitioner. Reliance is also placed on Exhibit P2 to
substantiate the said contention. She contends that, thereafter, arrears of pay
was paid, as per which pay of the petitioner was refixed at Rs. 12,590/- with
effect from 12.08.2004, and increments were also authorised raising the pay to
Rs. 13,610/- as on 01.08.2007. It is the case of the petitioner that, in view of the
refixation of pay as well as the grant of increments, the petitioner was entitled to
higher pensionary benefits. In the said circumstances, she submitted an
application before the Headmaster of the School, who submitted Exhibit P4
application before the 2nd respondent for revision of pensionary benefits. The
said request was rejected by the AEO by stating that revision can be carried out
subject to orders in W.P.(C) No.20385/2019 filed by the petitioner or after getting
clarification from the office of the DDE. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has
approached this Court seeking to quash Ext.P5 and for incidental reliefs.
3. In the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, it is stated that
the 5th respondent is the authority for pay admission and for grant of subsequent
benefits. It was for want of clarification that the request was rejected. It is further
stated that Ext.P5 was issued in accordance with the directions issued by the 5th
respondent.
4. I have heard Sri.P.M. Pareeth, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, and the learned Government Pleader.
WP(C) NO. 2852 OF 2020
5. The learned Government Pleader reiterated the contentions in the
counter affidavit that the request is rejected for want of clarification of G.O. No.
90/2019.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced.
7. I find that by Exhibit P2 pay fixation and higher grade sanctioning
order, the pay of the pension was refixed, and increments have been authorised
raising the pay to Rs.13,610/- in the scale of Rs.10,790 to Rs.18,000/- as on
01.08.2007. Admittedly, the monthly pension received by the petitioner is based
on the pre-revised pay of Rs.12,930/-. The request for revision was rejected on
untenable grounds. I find that the earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner was
withdrawn by order dated 21.01.2022. The other reason for rejection is that the
5th respondent has not authorised the revision of pension. Both the grounds
cannot be sustained under law. I am of the view that necessary directions can be
issued to the 2nd respondent to take a decision expeditiously after getting
clarifications, if any, from the 5th respondent.
Resultantly, this writ petition is ordered as follows:
a) Ext.P5 will stand quashed.
b) It is declared that the petitioner is entitled to get her
pensionary benefits revised in tune with the refixed pay of
Rs.13,610/- as on 1.8.2007.
WP(C) NO. 2852 OF 2020
c) There will be a direction to the 2nd to sanction revised
pensionary benefits due to the petitioner reckoning her
last pay at Rs.13,610/-.
d) Consequently, the petitioner shall also be entitled to
refix her monthly pension and balance amount of gratuity,
if any.
e) Necessary orders as directed above shall be issued
expeditiously, in any event, within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
f) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of
the writ petition along with the judgment before the
concerned respondent for further action.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
avs
WP(C) NO. 2852 OF 2020
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2852/2020
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
6.8.2018 IN WPC.NO.26404/2018.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER
NO.G3333/2018/KDIS DATED 24.10.2018 ENDORSING
THE STATEMENT OF FIXATION OF PAY OF THE
PETITIONER AS ON 12.8.2004.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED
4.3.2008 AUTHORIZED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
REVISION OF PENSIONARY BENEFITS OF THE
PETITIONER ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER DATED
12.6.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED
12.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO
THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
