AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. 1. The Petitioner retired from the service as Headmaster of the Government Welfare L.P. School, Valiyakavu on 30.4.1989. He had 28 years of service as Headmaster. He became the Headmaster of the School on 13.6.1961.
The Petitioner was granted higher grade benefits after 10 years of service. Exhibit P1 is the copy of the G.O.(P) No. 480/89/Fin.dt.1.11.1989 providing for benefits of higher grade to the Government employees, etc. Second higher grade is provided as per Exhibit P2 order. It provides that such grade will be granted on 20 years of service with effect from 16.9.1985 in the post of Government and Primary School Headmasters, including those who are working as Probationary Headmaster/Headmaster prior to the introduction of Headmaster''s scale on 1.6.1973. Later, a modified order was issued by the Government as per Exhibit P3.
It is the case of the Petitioner that in respect of similarly placed persons, such benefit was granted, but the benefit due to the Petitioner by way of second higher grade has not been granted. Exhibit P4 is the representation filed by the Petitioner on 6.12.2009 and Exhibit P5 is the acknowledgment card evidencing the same. It is averred in the Writ Petition that the Petitioner had been filing representations from time to time, dated 25.6.2002, 8.7.2004, 7.2.2006, 8.7.2008 and 16.12.2009. It is further averred in paragraph 7 that in the case of PD Teachers and other categories of employees on completion of 20 and 25 years of service, they were already granted sanction by the Government and accordingly, the Petitioner is also entitled for second and third higher grade on completion of 20 and 25 years.
The Assistant Educational Officer has filed a counter affidavit. There is no counter affidavit from the part of the Government. The Petitioner''s claim will have to be considered by the Government. In that view of the matter, as no orders have been passed on the representations filed by the Petitioner so far, there will be a direction to the 1st Respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P4 representation after notice to the Petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The entitlement of the Petitioner for second higher grade based on Exhibits P2 and P3 will be considered and if found eligible due benefits will be sanctioned and disbursed to him accordingly, since he had retired from service as early as in 1989.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.