Disposed

Abdul Fathah v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Dec 2012WP(C)/4497/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, government teachers, challenged conditions imposing leave without allowance for B.Ed. training despite statutory provisions granting increment benefits. The Court found discrimination if facts are similar and directed the respondent to decide the case in light of a prior judgment within two months.

What did the court decide?

First respondent directed to consider the case in light of W.P.(C)No.23694/2012 and take a decision after hearing within two months.

Abdul Fathah Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/21ST AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 4497 of 2012 (J)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. ABDUL FATHAH, HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER (COMMERCE)

¶8

MILADY SHERIFF MEMORIAL SECONDARY SCHOOL CHATHINAMKULAM, KOLLAM.

¶9

2. NAZEERA BEEGUM,

¶10

HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER,(COMMERCE) MILADY SHERIFF MEMORIAL SECONDARY SCHOOL CHATHINAMKULAM, KOLLAM.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY

¶12

RESPONDENT(S):

¶13

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

¶14

(GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT) DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,TRIVANDRUM-695 001.

¶15

2. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR TRIVANDRUM-695 001.

¶16

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LOWSY A.

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-12-2012, ALONG WITH WPC. NO.7204 OF 2012 AND CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

tss

¶19

W.P.(C) NO.4497/2012

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17/7/2006 SANCTIONING LEAVE TO THE 1ST PETITIONER.

¶23

EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22/9/2007 SANCTIONING LEAVE TO THE 2ND PETITIONER.

¶24

EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29/3/2007 IN WPC.10522 OF 2007.

¶25

EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7/2/2012 IN IA.NO.1753 OF 2012 IN WPC.75 OF 2012.

¶26

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

tss

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶32

¶33

W.P.(c) Nos. 4497, 72049173, 9321 OF 2012

¶34

¶35

Dated this the 12^th day of December , 2012

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

Petitioners are teachers working in various Government Higher Secondary schools. While working as teachers, petitioners applied for leave under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Service Rules for joining and completing the B.Ed. course. In Ext.P1 sanction order, it was stated that the period of leave without allowance would not be counted for service benefits including pension. According to the petitioners, the provisions regarding grant of increment and other service benefits for teachers taking leave without allowance for B.Ed. course and other teacher's training courses is contained in the 3^rd proviso to Rule 33(a)(2) of Part I K.S.R. The said provision clearly states that the leave without allowance granted for completing the Teacher's training course will count for increment purposes. The condition in Exts.P1 is impugned as contrary to this statute. Petitioners also rely on the judgment in W.P.(C)No.26782/05, wherein a learned Judge of this Court had considered the matter and decided the question

¶38

W.P.(C)Nos.4497/2012 & connected cases

¶39

¶40

in favour of the petitioner herein.

¶41

In the above circumstances, this Court finds that if the facts are similar, there cannot be any discrimination. However, learned Government Pleader points out that, the relevant rule was amended with effect from 11/05/2005 and that the leave granted on dates subsequent to the date of amendment to the rule stands on a different footing and consequently, the petitioners cannot claim the benefit of the judgment.

¶42

The writ petition will stand disposed of as follows:

¶43

The first respondent shall consider the case of petitioners in the light of the judgment in W.P.(C)No.26782/05 and take a decision strictly in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is open to the petitioners to raise all their contentions including the contention.

¶44

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶45

sv.

¶46

“ W.P.(C)No.26782/05” referred to in the first and third paragraphs of

¶47

common judgment dated 12/12/2012 W.P.(C) No. 4497/2012 and connected

¶48

W.P.(C)Nos.4497/2012 & connected cases 3

¶49

cases is corrected and substituted as “ W.P.(C)No.23694/2012” as per order

¶50

dated 09/01/2013 in W.P.(C)No.4497/2012 and connected cases.

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

Registrar ( Judicial)

¶53

W.P.(C)Nos.4497/2012 & connected cases

¶54

Abdul Fathah v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Fathah v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Subramaniam Potti Vs Devaswom Board Commissioner

K.I.Xavier Vs Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board

Binitha Chandran Vs Kreala Public Service Commission

M.K.Sajeevan Vs Guruvayoor Devaswom Represented by Its Administrator

Nijil Dimlee P. Vs the Director of Public Instruction

The Manager Vs the University of Kerala