MOHANAN T Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner retired from service as Headmaster on 31.3.2004. He entered service on 7.6.1967 in the post of P.D. Teacher. He was entitled for Selection Grade on 7.6.1992 on completion of 23 years of service. Ext.P1 is the Government order dated 7.3.1991 whereby, with regard to Headmasters of Primary Schools and High Schools, certain norms were adopted for fixation of pay on notional basis in the Selection Grade. Para.2(i) of the same permitted persons like the petitioner to submit the option. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted option and the fixation was sanctioned. The date opted is 1.7.1992 in the selection grade. He was enjoying the benefit also. But, later, an audit objection was raised in the year 1999 as per Ext.P3, and against the same, he approached the Accountant General by Ext.P4 representation. The petitioner thereafter approached the Government also by filing Ext.P5 representation. At that point of time, he was faced with recovery proceedings also. The Government finally rejected his claim as per Ext.P6. This is under challenge in this Writ Petition.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the view taken in Ext.P3 by relying upon the clauses of G.O. (P).No.380/94/(13)/Fin. dated 9.6.1994 cannot be supported. It is pointed out that Ext.P1 order was passed by the Government with regard to the grant of benefits of Higher Grade in respect of Primary School Teachers who were promoted as Headmasters prior to 1.7.1988 and who would have been eligible for Selection Grade in that category but for their promotion as Headmasters. Herein, the petitioner was promoted as Headmaster on 01.04.1987. Therefore, he squarely comes within the purview of para.2(i) of Ext.P1. It is therefore, submitted that, the option submitted at that point of time was found to be correct and was acted upon. The Government Order issued in 1994 is in respect of the pay revision 1993 effected from 1.3.1992. At any stretch of imagination, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, it cannot affect a fixation made as per 1988 pay revision since it was validly made as per Ext.P1 at that point of time.

(3.) The issue therefore, has to be resolved based on the relevant clauses of Exts.P1 and P7. Para.2(i) of Ext.P1 is extracted below:--