GOPINATHAN, J.

1. These appeals arise from a common judgment dated 10.7.2009 in W.P.(C). Nos. 34361/2007 and 8144/2008. The appellant in W.A.No.439/10 are the respondents in W.P.(C) No.34361/07. The appellants in W.A.No.455/10 are the respondent 1 to 3 in W.P.(C) No.8144/08. The appellant in W.A. 1205/2010 is the petitioner in W.P. (C) No.34361/07. The appellant in W.A.No.1061/10 is the petitioner in the other writ petition. Hereinafter, unless otherwise required, the parties are referred to as the petitioners and the respondents as in the writ petition. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.34361/07 entered the State service as High School Assistant in Government Higher Secondary School, Thodupuzha on 12.1.1983. The other petitioner entered the service as Assistant in St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School, Kaliyar, Thodupupzha. While in service, the Government issued 1992 pay revision order which came into force with effect from 1.3.1992. As per the pay revision order, a Government servant who completes 10 years of service in the entry cadre is entitled to a higher scale of pay in the next higher grade. All employees are given option for choosing a date for opting the revised pay scale. Rule 8 of the pay revision order deals with exercise of option. Rule 8 reads as follows:

“8. Exercise of Option

(a) A government servant may elect to continue to draw pay in the existing scale until the date on which he earns his next increment or until he vacates his post or ceases to draw pay in that scale or until such date as the employee considers necessary.

Provided that the option to retain the existing scale under the proviso to this rule shall be admissible only in respect of one existing scale. In cases of subsequent6 reversions only, the employees will be allowed to exercise option in r/o the lower post also. Such option will be exercised within a period of 3 months from the date order of reversion.

The aforesaid option shall not be admissible to any person appointed to a post on or after the 1st day of March 1992, whether for the first time in Government service, or by transfer or promotion from another post and he shall be allowed pay in the new post, only in the revised scale”

The petitioners accordingly submitted their options for revision and for time bound higher grade promotion. Accepting the option their salary was revised and granted higher grade promotion. Subsequently, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.8144/08 submitted are option for pay revision. The other petitioner filed are option for availing the first higher grade. Both the re options were accepted by the authority concerned and pay was accordingly re fixed, drawn and disbursed. During audit by the Accountant General, it was noticed that by virtue of fixation in pursuance to the re option, they have opted to the revised pay and the time bound higher grade promotion on different dates and that it is not permitted. Their higher grade promotion can only be on a date subsequent to the pay revised and their promoted post would be automatically under the revised pay and there is no question of option for the commencement of the revised pay in the promoted post. It was also noticed that owing to acceptance of re-option and re fixation, the petitioners had obtained undue pecuniary advantage which is liable to be recovered from the petitioners. Accordingly, action was initiated. Thereupon the petitioners had approached this Court with the above writ petitions assailing the recovery proceedings.

2. The leaned Single Judge after referring to Rule 8 for the exercise of the option found that the petitioners could not have opted for time bound higher grade promotion on any date subsequent to the date when they become eligible for such promotion. Therefore cancellation of their option by which they opted to a subsequent date to the date of becoming eligible for time bound promotion was found against the rules of fixation of pay. It was also found that the petitioners are not entitled to