Allowed

C.L.Francis v. State of Kerla

Kerala HC19 Jul 2013WP(C)/12116/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed a school to pay the petitioner salary and allowances for a period of over six years during which he was appointed and worked but whose appointment was initially rejected and later approved via government orders.

What did the court decide?

The school was directed to pay the petitioner salary and allowances for the period from 16-11-1994 to 5-6-2000 within three months, with 12% interest from the date of default.

C.L.Francis Vs State of Kerla — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.P.RAY

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2013/28TH ASHADHA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 12116 of 2004 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

C.L.FRANCIS, PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER, ST.FRANCIS HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS, MATTOM, THIRSSUR DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.C.P.SUDHAKARA PRASAD SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.S.RAMESH SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH SRI.NAVEEN.T

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

2. THE CORPROATE MANAGER, ST.FRANCIS READING ASSOCIATION CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, ST.FRANCIS HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS, MATTOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶12

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKKEN R2 BY ADV.SMT.DEEPA THANKAM

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C).No. 12116 of 2004 (P)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER'(S) EXHIBITS:

¶17

EXT.P1	COPY OF ORDER, GO.RT.NO.4408/94/GE. DATED 1.11.1994.
EXT.P2	COPY OF ORDER, G.O.(RT)NO.2755/95/G.EDN. DATED 13.10.95.
EXT.P3	COPY OF ORDER, G.O.(RT)NO.2755/99/G.EDN. DATED 17.6.1999.
EXT.P4	COPY OF ORDER DATED 14.11.95 IN CMP NO.32098/95 IN OP NO.17698/95 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXT.P5	COPY OF ORDER DATED 8.3.96 IN CMP NO.32098/95 IN OP NO.1769895 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXT.P6	COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 25.11.2002 IN W.A.NO.615/2000 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXT.P7	COPY OF OF ORDER, G.O.(RT) NO.444/04/G.EDN. DATED 27.01.04 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

¶18

RESPONDENT'(S) EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

BKA

B.P.RAY, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.12116 OF 2004

¶24

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19^th day of July, 2013

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

This writ petition was filed seeking for a direction to quash Ext.P7 and for a direction to the respondents to disburse the salary and other allowances to the petitioner for the period from 16-11-1994 to 5-6-2000.

¶27

Petitioner was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in St.Francis High School, Mattom, Thrissur District on two occasions, from 25-11-1991 to 30-1-1992 and another from 15-9-1992 to 15-12-1992 in the leave vacancy of one Smt.E.K.Mathiri. Smt.E.K.Mathiri retired from service on 31-3-1992 and in that retirement vacancy, the petitioner was again appointed with effect from 28-6-1993. The second respondent is having two High Schools, namely, St.Francis High School for Boys, Mattom and St.Francis High School for Girls, Mattom. One post each of Physical Education Teacher was in existence in the High School Section in both these schools and another post of Physical Education Teacher was also in existence in the U.P.Section. From 1986 onwards, Mr.P.D.Kochappan was the Physical Education Teacher in the U.P.Section. Though the petitioner was appointed in the above two spells of leave vacancy and thereafter in the permanent retirement vacancy of Smt.Mathiri, these appointments were not approved by the Educational Authorities on the ground that

¶28

W.P.(C)No.12116 OF 2004

¶29

:: 2 ::

¶30

Sri.P.D.Kochappan is an excess hand as per Rule 6B(i) of Chapter XXIII of the KER and that the vacancy occurred in the High School section on the retirement of Smt.E.K.Mathiri has to be provided to Sri.P.D.Kochappan. The Manager has filed appeal and revision before the educational authorities and the same was rejected. Against the refusal to approve the appointment of the petitioner, he has filed a revision petition before the Government. During the pendency of the revision petition, the petitioner was retrenched from service on 29-9-1993 and in that vacancy Sri.P.D.Kochappan was appointed in the High School Section. Since no orders were passed on the revision petition, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing O.P.5104/94 and the same was disposed of with a direction to the Government to pass orders on the revision petition within a period of two months. But the Government has failed to pass orders on the revision petition within the stipulated time and hence the petitioner has moved a Contempt of Court Case and only then, the Government has passed Ext.P1 Government Order i.e., G.O.(Rt)No.4408/94/G.Edn. dated 1-11-1994. In Ext.P1, it was ordered that Sri.P.D.Kochappan, Physical Education Teacher born in the U.P.Section under the clubbing arrangement in both the schools can continue as such in the U.P.Section of the two schools and since the petitioner is a fully qualified hand and also

¶31

W.P.(C)No.12116 OF 2004

¶32

:: 3 ::

¶33

the school is entitled for a post of Physical Education Teacher in the High School Section as there are more than five periods in the High School Section for Physical Education, it was ordered that the appointment of the petitioner as Physical Education Teacher in the High School Section for various spells commencing from 25-11-1991 is approved as fully qualified. Accordingly, as per Ext.P1 order the petitioner was reappointed in service on 16-11-1994 and continued as such.

¶34

It is true that during the period in question, petitioner has actually worked in the post of Physical Education Teacher in the High School Section based on the Government Order as well as the interim direction of this Court. While so, the above Government Order was challenged by another Physical Education Teacher and this Court while setting aside that order, directed the Government to rehear the matter after hearing the petitioner therein. While disposing of that Original Petition, this Court has directed to maintain status quo and hence allowed the petitioner to continue in service. Subsequently, the Government has issued Ext.P2 order, by which the appointment of the petitioner with effect from 16-11-1994 was not approved and hence the petitioner has challenged the same in O.P.17698/95 before this Court and Exts.P4 and P5 interim orders were passed. Accordingly, the petitioner continued in service till the

¶35

W.P.(C)No.12116 OF 2004

¶36

:: 4 ::

¶37

disposal of the Original Petition in 2000. When the appeal filed against that judgment was pending, the petitioner was again appointed in a retirement vacancy on 5-6-2000 and continuing as such.

¶38

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No.2.

¶39

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to get salary for the period from 16-11-1994 to 5-6-2000. Hence I direct respondent No.2 to pay salary for the period from 16-11-1994 to 5-6-2000 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, failing which respondent No.2 shall pay 12% interest from the date of default till the date of remittance.

¶40

Writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

¶41

B.P.RAY, JUDGE

¶42

jes

C.L.Francis v. State of Kerla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.L.Francis v. State of Kerla

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

Corporate Manager Vs Registrar, Calicut University

Dr.N.R.Nisha Vs University of Kerala

V.Gourikutty Vs State of Kerala

S.Muhammed Youseph Vs State of Kerala

Director of Collegeiate Edn. Tvm Vs Dr.K.Sadasivan & Others

H.Haleefathudeen Vs State of Kerala