Disposed

Reni a. v. P.C.Binoy

Kerala HC8 Oct 2010Con.Case(C)/1021/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt petition, the Kerala High Court examined an allegation that the Public Service Commission violated an interim order. The Court held it was not satisfied that the violation was deliberate. Dissolved the contempt proceedings, directing the petitioner to raise its grievance regarding service reckoning in the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed; petitioner directed to press grievance about service reckoning in writ petition.

Reni a. Vs P.C.Binoy — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2010 / 16TH ASWINA 1932

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 1021 of 2010(S) ------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.28427/2009 Dated 29/03/2010 ....................

¶6

PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS

¶7

¶8

RENI.A, S/O.G.ANTONY, AGED 38 YEARS, HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER, GOVERNMENT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,PUNALUR, KOLLAM

¶9

MUHAMMED RAFEEQUE, S/O.ABOOBACKER, AGED 39 YEARS, HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER, N.A.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL , PERINGATHUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 675.

¶10

PONNAMMA.K,W/O.BAHULEYAN, AGED 43 YEARS HIGHER SECONDARY TEACHER IN BOTANY GOVERNMENT GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,HARIPAD ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ

¶12

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT NO.2

¶13

¶14

P.C.BINOY, FATHER'S NAME AND AGE ARE NOT KNWON TO THE PETITIONERS, SECRETARY KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶15

ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC FOR R1

¶16

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

¶18

=============

¶19

C.O.(C). No.1021 OF 2010

¶20

===================== Dated this the 8^th day of October, 2010

¶21

Petitioners complain of non-compliance by the Public

¶22

Service Commission of Annexure 2 interim order which reads thus:-

¶23

“The petitioners would contend that even if the question as to whether Higher Secondary School teachers are teaching staff of Government Schools is decided against them, they are entitled to be considered for appointment to the post of D.E.O., since their lien in the post of H.S.A still continues. In this regard they rely on a Full Bench decision in Balakrishnan Nair v. Ram Mohan Nair (1998 (1) KLT 766). The learned standing counsel for the P.S.C. submits that in S.L.P. No.13339/2008 although the relief granted to similarly placed persons regarding continuation of lien has been upheld by the supreme Court, the question of law as to whether the lien of persons who have accepted another employment through P.S.C., in the former post continues until they become regular members of the new service, is kept left open by the Supreme Court.

¶24

I am of the opinion that in view of the paucity of time to hear these matters finally before vacation, some interim orders have to be passed. Admittedly going by the Full Bench decision the petitioners are entitled

¶25

C.O.(C). No.1021 OF 2010 2

¶26

to retain lien in the post of H.S.A., since they have not become full members of the Higher Secondary Education Department, although the Supreme Court has been left open the question of law. It is not disputed before me by the 2^nd respondent that the petitioners have not been confirmed in the post of H.S.S.T and therefore their lien in the post of H.S.A. continues. Therefore I direct the Public Service Commission to interview the petitioners also and include them if they are otherwise eligible to be included in the rank list, subject to further orders in this writ petition. They shall be interviewed treating them as H.S.As provided they are otherwise eligible.”

¶27

The petitioners contention is that despite the said order, the Public Service Commission has refused to consider the petitioners for selection on the ground that they did not have 10 years' service as H.S.A. The contention of the petitioner is that the very object of the order was to treat the petitioners as H.S.As although they are Higher Secondary School teachers on the ground of their lien, which would necessarily mean that their service as H.S.S.T also should be reckoned as service as H.S.A. I am not satisfied that such an inference automatically arises

¶28

C.O.(C). No.1021 OF 2010 3

¶29

from A2 order. Therefore, I am not satisfied that the PSC has deliberately violated A2 order. If the petitioner has any other grievance against the stand of the PSC that the petitioners do not have 10 years' service as H.S.A it is for them to press that contention in the writ petition itself. Therefore, without prejudice to that right the contempt case is closed.

¶30

Post the writ petition before the appropriate Bench.

¶31

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE.

¶32

Reni a. v. P.C.Binoy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reni a. v. P.C.Binoy

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

P.Rajan Vs Union of India

K.R.Bose Vs the Ksfdc

Mariyakutty Umma Vs Director of Panchayath

E.v.Appukuttan Pillai Vs Kerala Water Authority

Adv.K.T.Raveendranath Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Ravisankara v. Vs State of Kerala and Others