Partly allowed

Biju T. Nair v. State of Kerala & Others

Kerala HC7 Nov 2012WP(C)/3049/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that the petitioner, a Full-Time Menial who lost his post when the promoted teacher reverted back, is not entitled to retain the position. The court rejected the prayer to quash cancellation orders but directed payment of salary and benefits for specific working periods.

What did the court decide?

Relief to quash exhibits rejected; petitioner directed to be paid salary and benefits for specified working periods.

Biju T. Nair Vs State of Kerala & Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/16TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 3049 of 2008 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

BIJU T.NAIR, S/O. THANKAPPAN NAIR, AGED 35 YEARS, THULISALA KOIKAL HOUSE, ELANTHOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, FULL-TIME MENIAL, SREE VIVEKANANDA HIGH SCHOOL, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.V.MANOJ KUMAR, SRI.IYPE JOSEPH.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

2. JOINT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

3. THE MANAGER, SREE VIVEKANANDA HIGH SCHOOL, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶13

4. THE HEADMISTRESS, SREE VIVEKANANDA HIGH SCHOOL, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶14

5. RUBESH KUMAR, CHERUMALA VEEDU, KURANGAZHA P.O., PULLAD, THIRUVALLA, PIN-689 548, WORKING AS PEON, SREE VIVEKANANDA HIGH SCHOOL, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶15

Prv.

¶16

W.P.9C).NO.3049/2008-K:

¶17

*ADDL.R.6 IMPLEADED:

¶18

6. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶19

*IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 22/07/08 IN I.A. 9335/08.

¶20

R1,R2 & R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. VIJU THOMAS, R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN, R4 BY ADV. SRI.S.HARIKRISHNAN, R5 BY ADV. SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY.

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

Prv.

¶23

W.P.(C). NO.3049/2008-K:

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶26

EXT.P.1:	COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FIXATION OF PAY IN THE REVISED PAY SCALE SANCTIONED IN G.O.(P).145/2006/FIN. DTD. 25/03/2006.
EXT.P.2:	COPY OF THE ORDER NO.63/07-08 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE R.3. DTD. 13/08/2007.
EXT.P.3:	COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D. DIS. 94325/05 R.A.(1) DPI OF THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, TRIVANDRUM DTD. 13/03/2007.
EXT.P.4:	COPY OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM DTD. 07/09/2007.
EXT.P.4:	A COPY OF THE STAY PETITION PREFERRED BEFORE THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM DTD. 07/09/2007.
EXT.P.5:	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.27798/07 DTD. 19/09/2007.
EXT.P.6:	COPY OF THE ORDER .GO.(RT).NO.5936/07/G. EDN. DTD. 31/12/2007 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT.
EXT.P.7:	COPY OF THE G.O.(P).NO.187/2005/G. EDN. DTD. 17/06/2005.
EXT.P.8:	COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 21/12/2007 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.4.
EXT.P.9:	COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D. DIS 5603/B2/05 ISSUED BY DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA DTD. 15/07/2005.
EXT.P.10:	COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER CUTTING OF MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DTD. 03/11/2007.
EXT.P.10.A:	COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER CUTTING OF MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DTD. 19/03/2007.
EXT.P.11:	COPY OF THE REPLY SENT TO THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER BY ADDITIONAL SECRETARY AND PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, GENERAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DTD. 14/02/2008.

¶27

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

Prv.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶32

W.P(C).No. 3049 of 2008

¶33

Dated this the 7^th day of November, 2012 JUDGMENT

¶34

The petitioner was working as a Full-Time Menial in Sree Vivekananda High School, Pullad, Pathanamthitta District. According to him, he was in continuous service since 2.7.2001, but, he was retrenched from service with effect from 15.7.2005 as per Exhibit P2 order dated 13.8.2007. Exhibit P2 order came to be passed on the basis of revised staff fixation order dated 1.8.2007 of the District Educational Officer. According to the petitioner, he was neither heard nor an opportunity was given before passing the impugned order. The reason for termination of service was that the fifth respondent was also working in the same School from 1.6.1996 as Full-Time Menial and he being a qualified hand for the post of Hindi Teacher was appointed as Last Grade Hindi Teacher with effect from 5.6.2002. He was retrenched from service on 15.7.2005 due to fall in division during the academic year 2005-2006. On such background the petitioner also lost his opportunity in the School.

¶35

It is the contention of the petitioner that appointment of

¶36

¶37

WP(C).3049/08

¶38

the fifth respondent has to be considered afresh. I do not think so. The petitioner was appointed as Full-Time Menial in the vacancy position on upgradation of the fifth respondent. As the fifth respondent's opportunity is lost and he was reverted back to the post of Full-Time Menial, the petitioner being the juniormost, is not entitled to remain in the said post. I do not think that there is any illegality in the order passed by the Government.

¶39

The petitioner has a further claim for salary arrears and other benefits from 5.6.2002 to 28.9.2002, from 15.7.2005 to 30.9.2005 and from 1.7.2007 to 14.8.2007. If the petitioner had actually worked during the aforesaid period and the order of termination was passed only on 13.8.2007, the petitioner is entitled for payment of salary. It is stated that the order of termination will be effective from 15.7.2005.

¶40

Under these circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows:

¶41

The relief prayed for quashing Exhibits P2, P3 and P6 is rejected. The petitioner shall be paid salary and all other benefits, if he had worked during the period from 5.6.3003 to 28.9.2002, from 15.7.2005 to 30.9.2005 and from 1.7.2007 to 14.8.2007,

¶42

¶43

WP(C).3049/08

¶44

within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE,

JUDGE

vgs

Biju T. Nair v. State of Kerala & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju T. Nair v. State of Kerala & 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

Elite Foods Private Ltd. Vs the Assistant Provident Fund Commissione

Preety Mathew Vs the Authorised Officer, Indusind Bank

Manoj.v.Jose Vs Asst.Provident Fund Commissioner

Sudhir Rajan Vs the Indian Institute of Management

K.P.Sobha Vs State of Kerala and Others

Rev.Hendry D.Daveed Vs the District Collector, Tvm.