Allowed

Jayasree K.V. and Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Kerala HC14 Jun 2016WP(C)/25160/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged audit objection orders threatening recovery of amounts related to senior grade fixation. The Court accepted that the government had already addressed the grievance via an order dated 8.6.2009, leading to the quashing of the impugned orders and prohibitory declaration.

What did the court decide?

Exhibits P3 and P4 quashed; no amounts to be recovered from petitioners based on these exhibits; petition allowed.

Jayasree K.V. and Others Vs State of Kerala… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/24TH JYAISHTA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 25160 of 2008 (T)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. JAYASREE.K.V, HEADMISTRESS,, CHIDAMBARANATH U.P SCHOOL, RAMANTHALI, KANNUR DT. 2. HEMAJA.K.N,HEADMISTRESS, CENTRAL A.L.P SCHOOL,, KARIVELLUR, P.O. KARIVELLUR,, KANNUR DT. 3. JOSEPH.A.J, HEADMASTER,, ST. JOSEPH U.P SCHOOL, JOSEGIRI, P.O. JOSEGIRI, KANNUR. 4. O.V. SAROJINI, HEADMISTRESS, THALORA A.L.P SCHOOL,, THALORA, P.O. KUTTIYERI, TALIPARAMBA VIA,, KANNUR. 5. K. RADHA, HEADMISTRESS, PERINTHATTA A.L.P SCHOOL,, P.O. PORAKKUNNU, M.M. BAZAR VIA,, KANNUR. 6. C.K. PREETHA, HEADMISTRESS,, S.V.A.L.P SCHOOL, ALAKKAD, KALEESWARAM.P.O, KANKOL, KANNUR. 7. D. SUMATHI, HEADMISTRESS,, KANKOL A.L.P SCHOOL, P.O. KANKOL, KANNUR DT. 8. T. GEETHA, HEADMISTRESS, RAMANTHALI PANCHAYATH, L.P SCHOOL, RAMANTHALI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 9. K.P. RAMANI, HEADMISTRESS, ANNUR U.P SCHOOL, ANNUR, P.O. ANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ

¶9

-2-

¶10

WP(C).No. 25160 of 2008

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL,

¶13

EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR.

¶14

3. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TALIPARAMBA NORTH.

¶16

5. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PAYYANNUR. R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ALOYSCIOUS THOMAS

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

¶18

14-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C).No. 25160 of 2008

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶22

EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF G.O(P)No.1811/99/(38)FIN. DATED 15.9.1999. EXHIBIT P2: COPYOF G.O(P)125/06/FIN. DATED 17.3.2006 AND G.O(P) 145/2006 DATED 25.3.2006.

¶23

EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF LETTER DATED 2.6.2008 ISSUED BY THE AEO, TALIPARAMBA NORTH TO THE HEADMASTER OF THE SCHOOL TOGETHER WITH AUDIT OBJECTION.

¶24

EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF LETTER DATED 5.7.2008 ISSUED BY AEO PAYYANNUR TO THE HEADMISTRESS OF KANKOL ALP SCHOOL WHERE THE 7TH PETITIONER IS WORKING.

¶25

/TRUE COPY/

¶26

PS TO JUDGE

¶27

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶28

----------------------------------------------W.P(C).No.25160 of 2008

¶29

Dated this the 14^th June, 2016

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

The challenge in this writ petition is against Exhibits P3 and P4 as also for directions to the respondents to retain the benefit of notional higher grades granted to the petitioners on the basis of the length of service as teacher while effecting the fixation of pay in the post of headmaster. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the writ petitioners are headmasters/headmistresses working in different schools. They had been working as teacher for long years. In the meanwhile, they were promoted as headmasters/headmistresses. It is submitted that the benefit of fixation in the Senior Grade/Selection Grade as teacher and the fixation of pay notionally first by grant of 23 years grade and later in the revised scale of pay of headmaster/headmistress was being granted in pay revisions in 1992 and 1997. However, consequent to the pay revision in 2004, the benefit was granted to the petitioners on account of Exhibit P3 audit objection and Exhibit P4 order and they were threatened with recovery as well. In the above circumstances, they approached this Court.

¶32

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶33

¶34

WP(C).25160/08

¶35

It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader, on written instructions, that the benefit of notional grade promotion and consequent refixation was made available to the petitioners by Government order dated 8.6.2009. The grievance voiced by the writ petitioners, therefore, stands redressed by Government order dated 8.6.2009. This submission made on behalf of the official respondents is recorded. Exhibits P3 and P4 therefore no longer apply to the petitioners. They are quashed.

¶36

In the above circumstances, it is declared that no amounts shall be recovered from the petitioners on the basis of Exhibits P3 and P4.

¶37

The writ petition is allowed as above.

¶38

ANU SIVARAMAN

¶39

vgs15/6

Jayasree K.V. and Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayasree K.V. and Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hmt Employees Union (Citu) Vs the Chairman and M.D.

Mohammed Shafi Vs K.v.Vijayan

Jacob C.K. Vs Reghu Raman

Joseph Jacob Vs Kerala State Electricity Board and Ors.

Prasannan A.S. Vs the State of Kerala

Shobhana Narayanan Vs State of Kerala