IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RP.No. 744 of 2008()
1. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E),
... Petitioner
2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
Vs
1. V.G.SAHADEVAN, S/O.LATE GOPALAN,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.N.MANOJ KUMAR, SPECIAL GOVT.PLEADER
For Respondent :SRI.N.ANILKUMAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :17/02/2010
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
R.P. No. 744 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 17th day of February, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The State seeks review of the judgment in W.P.(C)
No.2164/2004 which reads thus:
“Petitioner approached this court aggrieved by Ext.P3 in the
matter of reckoning of military service for the second and third
higher grades. It is seen that the issue was subject matter of
Full Bench decision of this court in W.A.No.476/2007 wherein it
has been held that the military service can be counted only for
the purpose of first higher grade and not for subsequent higher
grades. However, it has been held by the Full Bench that the
amount already paid shall not be recovered. There will be a
direction to the respondents to take appropriate action in the
light of the judgment referred to above within a period of two
months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.”
2. The State is aggrieved by the sentence”However,
it has been held by the Full Bench that the amount already
paid shall not be recovered”. The contention of the learned
Government Pleader is that in the Full Bench decision in
writ appeal No.476/2007, the Full Bench only directed that
the excess amount paid to the employee in that case shall
not be recovered in the special facts of that case without
the same being treated as a precedent. The apprehension
R.P. No. 744 of 2008
-2-
of the State is that the said sentence would be construed as
a direction that the amount shall not be recovered from the
petitioner. I am of opinion that the said sentence is only a
noting of what is stated in the Full Bench judgment and it
cannot be considered as a direction to apply the same in
this case. It is for the State to decide while considering the
matter as to whether the amounts should be recovered from
the petitioner, in the facts and circumstances of this case.
With the said clarification the review petition is disposed of.
S. SIRI JAGAN
JUDGE
shg/