This writ appeal concerning pension and retirement benefits was dismissed. The High Court upheld the lower court's decision rejecting the appellant's claim that his service as a Junior Research Investigator is equivalent to that of a Lecturer.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2010 / 4TH SRAVANA 1932
WA.No. 1235 of 2010() --------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.30489/2004 Dated 18/12/2008 ....................
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:-
-------------------------------------
DR.E.V.NARAYANA PANICKER, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER (RTD), PLOT NO.18, SREENAGAR, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:-
-----------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE ADDL.DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
4. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), KERALA, P.B.NO.5607, M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2010, THE COURT ON 26/07/2010 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Writ Appeal No.1235 of 2010.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 26th day of July, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
Gopinathan, J.
The writ appellant/petitioner was appointed as Lecturer on 28-12-1985 in Higher Education Department. Earlier, he was working as Junior Research Investigator in Agro-Economic Research Centre at Jabalpur from 5-10-1970 to 19-6-1980 and thereafter as Lecturer at Bhopal School of Social Science from 1-7-1980 to 21-12-1985. Though, the department counted both the above services for fixing grade, the Accountant General objected counting of service of Junior Research Investigator in Agro-Economic Research Centre at Jabalpur for the reason that it is not an equivalent post with that of Lecturer and it was not a teaching post. Aggrieved by Ext.P9 order issued by the 2nd respondent following the objection raised by the Accountant General, he preferred the writ petition seeking an order to quash
WA.No.1235/2010.
-: 2 :-
Ext.P9 order and also for a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to count the service rendered by the appellant at Jabalpur for determining the salary and retiral benefits. The learned single Judge by judgment dated 1812-2008 dismissed the writ petition upholding the objection raised by the respondents. Now this appeal filed with a delay of 523 days, of course with a petition to condone the delay.
WA.No.1235/2010.
-: 3 :-
of Junior Research Investigator in the Agro-Economic Research Centre was to collect primary and secondary data on socio-economic aspect, its scrutiny, tabulation, analysis and to help while preparation of draft report of the study. No doubt, these field or office work has no similarity with that of the Lecturer in a college. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the similarity is in the salary. We are unable to accept the argument that salary is a criteria to determine the similarity. Similarity shall be in the nature of work. We don't think that the experience he gained from the field and office work at Jabalpur would any way improve the performance of the appellant as Lecturer so as to entitle him to claim higher grade or retiral benefits. Account General is perfectly correct in objecting the claim of the appellant.
WA.No.1235/2010.
-: 4 :-
that he had undergone a regular study for obtaining M.Phil degree. It is submitted that the duration of M.Phil course is two years. According to the appellant, for study purpose he has availed leave for 9 months from September, 1978 to May, 1979. We are unable to accept the argument that the appellant could finish two year course in a study leave of 9 months. If what is stated in Ext.R2(a) is correct, the appellant should have been undergoing two years regular study. The argument that he was employed during that period smells rat. Ext.R2(a), the appellant's own document belie his claim that he was in regular service from 5.10.1970 to 19.6.1980. Everything as observed by the learned single Judge appears to be doubtful. Appellant has not come with clear hands. Adding to the above, there is a break of 11 days between the period of employment at Jabalpur and Bhopal. Break of 11 days cannot be taken as period spent on journey as argued by the learned counsel. It is taking into account of all these aspects the learned
WA.No.1235/2010.
-: 5 :-
single Judge dismissed the writ petition. We find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment on the basis of the given set of facts. The learned single Judge is correct in dismissing the writ petition. The appeal is devoid of merits. In the above circumstance, the writ appeal as well as the delay petition are dismissed. No costs.
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (Judge)
P.S.GOPINATHAN, (Judge)
Kvs/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the nature of work as Junior Research Investigator is equivalent to that of a College Lecturer.
Whether the appellant is entitled to count service from United Agro-Economic Research Centre for grade fixation and retirement benefits.
DR.E.V.NARAYANA PANICKER
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION
THE ADDL.DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION
THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), KERALA
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
P.S.GOPINATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
