IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 20540 of 2004(T)
1. K.M.MARIAM, P.D.TEACHER(RTD)
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
5. THE HEADMISTRESS, GOVT.L.P.SCHOOL,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.)
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
Dated :10/11/2008
O R D E R
KURIAN JOSEPH, J.
-----------------------------------------
W.P(C) No.20540 of 2004
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of November, 2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioner approached this court praying for a direction to the
respondents to fix her pay based on Ext.P2 re-option. That was turned
down as per Ext.P3 stating that the re-option exercised by the
petitioner does not come under the purview of the government orders
dated 5-2-1999 and 5-4-2003. It is seen that this court in
O.P.No.3548/2003 and connected cases had considered the very same
issue wherein it has been held as follows:-
“1) In the matter of the employees right to
exercise re-option, the question as to when the higher
grade was sanctioned or became due whether before or
after 31-5-1996 will be irrelevant. The cut off date will
be of no consequence as regards the right to exercise
re-option. All re-options exercised during the period
from 28-6-1997 to 27-9-1997 and the period from 5-2-
1999 to 4-5-1999 will stand accepted.
2) The monetary benefits resulting in favour of
the employees on account of the exercise of the re-
option will become admissible to them from the date of
effect of the re-option and not from the date of actual
filing of the re-option.
Because of the two positions emerging as above
objections, if any, raised by the Accountant General, the
Government or the Departmental Officers regarding re-
option exercised or re-option benefits due to the
employees will be illegal and liable to be rejected.”
It has also been held that the re-option exercised in terms of the
government order dated 5-2-1999 will have to be accepted.
W.P(C).No. 20540 of 2004
-:2:-
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 4th respondent
to consider afresh the case of the petitioner in the light of the
judgment referred to above and extend the similar treatment to the
petitioner ignoring Ext.P3 within a period of two months from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
(KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE)
ahg.
KURIAN JOSEPH, J.
———————————–
W.P(C).No. 20540 of 2004
———————————–
JUDGMENT
10th November, 2008