IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 211 of 2009(A)
1. A.SANTHAKUMARI AMMA, IST GRADE
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO
... Respondent
2. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E),
3. DIRECTOR OF SURVEY & LAND RECORDS,
4. THE DISTRICT/SUB TREASURY OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :30/06/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.211 of 2009 -A
--------------------------------------
Dated 30th June, 2009
JUDGMENT
Heard Smt. I.Sheeladevi, the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners and Sri.Antony Mukkath, the learned Government
Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is a pensioner. She retired from service
on 31.5.2003 while working as First Grade Surveyor. The petitioner
entered service as Second Grade Surveyor on 13.2.1969. She was
thereafter promoted to the category of First Grade Surveyor. When
the petitioner was appointed as Second Grade Surveyor, she was
placed in the scale of pay of Rs.90 – 190. At that point of time, only
those Second Grade Surveyors who had passed the Higher Grade
Surveyor Test were given the scale of pay of Rs.100-210. By Exts.P1
and P2 judgments, this Court held that all Second Grade Surveyors
appointed in the scale of pay of Rs.90-190 are entitled to be placed in
the scale of pay of Rs.100-210 with effect from the date on which they
were appointed and are also entitled to payment of arrears of salary
and allowances in the said scale of pay. Thereupon the Government
issued Ext.P3 order dated 13.1.2000 in implementation of the
directions issued by this Court in Exts.P1 and P2 judgments.
W.P.(C) No.211/2009 -:2:-
3. In the meanwhile, the scale of pay of Second Grade
Surveyors was revised from Rs.100 – 210 to Rs.240-445 in the 1973
pay revision and to Rs.350-580 in the 1978 pay revision. In view of
these developments, the petitioners and others who are similarly
placed, claimed an opportunity to exercise re-option pursuant to the
1973 and 1978 pay revisions. By Ext.P6 letter dated 16.3.2001, the
Government directed that the beneficiaries of Exts.P1 and P2
judgments and Ext.P3 Government order are not entitled to exercise
re-option. Ext.P6 was challenged in this Court in O.P.No.5925 of 2003
filed by persons similarly placed as the petitioners. By judgment
delivered on 29.8.2003, the said original petition was allowed. The
judgment of the learned single Judge was confirmed by Ext.P7
judgment delivered by a Division Bench of this Court. The Special
Leave Petition filed therefrom by the State of Kerala was dismissed by
the Apex Court by Ext.P8 order.
4. On coming to know of Ext.P7 judgment passed by this
Court, the petitioner moved the Director of Survey and Land Records
seeking the benefits flowing from the said judgment. She also
submitted Ext.P9 representation before the Director of Survey ad Land
Records along with others similarly placed. She thereafter filed W.P.
(C) No.970 of 2006 in this Court. By Ext.P10 judgment delivered on
W.P.(C) No.211/2009 -:3:-
30.1.2006, a learned single Judge of this Court directed the Director of
Survey and Land Records to consider Ext.P9 and pass orders thereon.
The Director of Survey and Land Records accordingly passed Ext.P11
order dated 28.4.2006. The Government thereafter sent Ext.P12
letter dated 16.12.2006 to the Director of Survey and Land Records
wherein the Government took the stand that date of re-option cannot
be extended beyond the date of effect of the subsequent pay revision
order. Thereupon, persons similarly placed as the petitioner filed W.P.
(C) No.19206 of 2007 in this Court. By Ext.P14 judgment dated
1.1.2008, a learned single Judge of this Court allowed the writ
petitions with certain directions. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners in
W.P.(C) No.19206 of 2007 filed W.A. No.1397 of 2008. By Ext.P15
order passed in the said writ appeal, a Division Bench of this Court
stayed the operation of Ext.P12 letter sent by the Government to the
Director of Survey and Land Records. While matters stood thus, the
Accountant General revised the pensionary benefits payable to the
petitioner and directed recovery of excess amount already drawn by
her. This writ petition was thereupon filed challenging Ext.P12 letter
sent by the Government to the Director of Survey and Land Records
and Exts.P17 and P17 (a) proceedings issued by the Accountant
General.
W.P.(C) No.211/2009 -:4:-
5. It is now brought to my notice that the Director of
Survey and Land Records has issued a Circular dated 7.4.2009
pursuant to the judgment of this Court in O.P.No.5925 of 2003 and
W.A.No.105 of 2005. When this writ petition came up for haring
today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
respondents may be directed to re-examine the petitioner’s case in the
light of the Circular dated 7.4.2009 issued by the Director of Survey
and Land Records. In my opinion, as this writ petition was filed on
1.1.2009, long before the Circular dated 7.4.2009 was issued by the
Director of Survey and Land Records, the respondents should
reconsider the petitioner’s case in the light of the said Circular.
6. In that view of the matter, I allow this writ petition,
quash Ext.P17 and P17 (a) and direct the Director of Survey and Land
Records to re-examine the petitioner’s case in the light of the Circular
dated 7.4.2009 issued by him and to pass orders thereon within three
months from the date on which the petitioner submits an appropriate
representation before him along with a certified copy of this
judgment. The petitioner shall also be afforded a reasonable
opportunity of being heard. The Director of Survey and Land Records
shall, after orders are passed as directed above, communicate a
copy thereof to the petitioner. Thereafter, the rights of parties will be
W.P.(C) No.211/2009 -:5:-
governed by the order passed by the Director of Survey and Land
Records subject to the right of the petitioner to challenge the same in
other appropriate proceedings if she is aggrieved thereby.
P.N.RAVINDRAN
Judge
mn