IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 34432 of 2010(D)
1. SIMON THOMAS, AGED 57 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :30/11/2010
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.34432 OF 2010
------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of November, 2010
JUDGMENT
As per Ext.P1 judgment dated 25th February,2010
in WP(C) No.36475 of 2003, the petitioner was
granted a chance for reoption on various dates on
which the petitioner’s pay was to be refixed. The
petitioner was directed to submit his reoption
within one month from the date of receipt of a copy
of the said judgment. The District Educational
Officer was directed to refix the petitioner’s pay
on various stages in accordance with the reoption,
if that reoption was otherwise allowable. However,
it was made clear that the reoption should not be
refused to be accepted on the ground that the time
for reoption was already over. It was also held
thus:
“The refixation shall be done as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate
within two months from the date of receipt
of the reoption. If consequent to such
refixation, any amount becomes refundable to
the petitioner, the same shall be refunded
to the petitioner within a period of oneW.P.(C).No.34432 OF 2010 2
month thereafter. Since the petitioner has
already retired from service on 31.3.2008,
the retirement benefits shall be recomputed
based on the refixation, which shall also be
done along with the refixation itself. The
arrears of retirement benefits if any, due
shall also be disbursed within the period
mentioned above.”
2. Thereafter, Ext.P3 order dated 27.5.2010 was
passed by the District Educational Officer. It was
held in Ext.P3 thus:
“Accordingly the petitioner submitted
re-option for various fixation of pay on
7.4.2010. On verifying the re-option thus
produced it is found that the petitioner
availed undue financial gain consequent on
the re-option. It is therefore binding on
the petitioner to refund the excess claim
availed by him for the following period.
1. 1.8.88 to 31.10.88
2. 22.9.88 to 24.11.88
3. 1.9.92 to 31.10.95
4. 1.3.97 to 24.11.98
5. 1.5.06 to 31.10.06
And with due references to the Option
and various Government Orders regulating the
pay fixation, the pay of the petitioner have
been finalized and statements for pay
fixation thus made are appended herewith.
Arrear claim if any consequent on the
fixation shall be made by presenting a
statement of excess drawal for the above
mentioned period in order that the excess
claim shall be adjusted in the arrear
claim.”
W.P.(C).No.34432 OF 2010 3
3. It would appear that a notice dated
24.6.2010 was sent on behalf of the petitioner to
the District Educational Officer, to which Ext.P5
reply dated 16.7.2010 was sent by the District
Educational Officer. It was stated in Ext.P5 that
the petitioner’s claim for revised sanction of
increment with effect from 26.7.1979 was quite
inadmissible. In this Writ Petition, the
petitioner challenges Exts.P3 and P5.
4. The learned Government Pleader submitted
that if the petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P3 and
P5 he has an alternative remedy of a revision under
Rule 92 of Chapter XIV A KER. That there is an
alternative remedy is not in dispute. Since the
petitioner has an effective alternative remedy, I
do not think it is necessary to consider the
correctness or otherwise of Exts.P3 and P5 in this
Writ Petition. If the petitioner files a revision
before the Government under Rule 92 of Chapter XIVA
K.E.R within a period of one month from today, the
W.P.(C).No.34432 OF 2010 4
same shall be considered by the Government within a
period of three months thereafter.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of the
Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment
before the first respondent.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
cms