Partly allowed

Lathakumari S. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Sept 2014OP(KAT)/297/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against an Administrative Tribunal order by staying the reversion of a petitioner promoted to Printer Grade I. The Court held that changing Special Rules does not retrospectively affect a past promotion and directed that the Government's reversion order be kept in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

The reversion of the petitioner as ordered in Annexure A10 is stayed until the OA is finally heard or otherwise ordered by the Tribunal.

Lathakumari S. Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/12TH BHADRA, 1936

¶6

OP(KAT).No. 297 of 2014 (Z)

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 1667/2014 of KERALA ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 01-09-2014

¶8

PETITIONER/APPLICANT:

¶9

LATHAKUMARI S., W/O. LATE ANILKUMAR, AGED 43 YEARS, GRADE I PRINTER, GOVERNMENT PRESS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. (RESIDING AT TC NO.16/870, MEELEKKUNNIL VEEDU, TPJ ROAD, PLAMOOD, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA - 695 004.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.M.SAJJAD

¶11

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶12

THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

THE DIRECTOR OF PRINTING, GOVERNMENT PRESS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA - 695 001.

¶14

R BY SRI. MOHAMMED SHAH, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

OP(KAT).No. 297 of 2014 (Z)

¶17

: 2 :

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶20

EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.A. NO. 1667/2014 DATED 01.09.2014 OF THE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BENCH.

¶21

EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ALONG WITH ANNEXURES.

¶22

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

ANTONY DOMINIC & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ.

¶27

-----------------------------------O.P. (KAT). No. 297 of 2014 -----------------------------------Dated this the 3rd day of September, 2014.

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Antony Dominic,J.

¶30

This Original Petition is filed aggrieved by the order dated 01.09.2014 passed by the Kerala Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram in O.A. No. 1667 of 2014.

¶31

The petitioner entered the service in the Printing Department as Last Grade Servant. In terms of Annexure A5 Special Rules, by Annexure A1 order dated 16.03.2013, she was promoted to the post of Printer Grade I. Subsequently, the Government issued

¶32

Annexure A9 order dated 26.06.2014 deleting the provision of Annexure A5 providing promotional avenues to the qualified Last Grade Servants to the post of Printer Grade I.

¶33

Referring to Annexure A9, the Government issued Annexure A10 order dated 28.06.2014 holding that the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Printer Grade I is illegal and that therefore she should be reverted and the monetary benefits should

¶34

¶35

O.P.(KAT) No. 297/2014

¶36

be recovered. It was aggrieved by these proceedings, the petitioner filed O.A No. 1667 of 2014 before the Tribunal where an interim direction requiring the respondents to keep in abeyance her reversion and other proceedings based on Annexure A10, was sought for. Considering the interim prayer so made, the Tribunal passed order dated 01.09.2014 staying recovery of salary ordered in Annexure A10 and allowing the petitioner to pursue her claim for promotion to the post of Printer Grade II. It is this order which is under challenge before us.

¶37

As we have already stated, the petitioner was already promoted to the post of Printer Grade I by Annexure A1 order dated 16.03.2013. It was while she was continuing in that post, the Special Rules were amended by Annexure A9 order dated 26.06.2014. The amendment does not say that the same is retrospective in effect. Therefore, prima facie, the amendment could not have affected promotion of the petitioner ordered by Annexure A1. In such circumstances, on the materials now available, prima facie, we are inclined to think that Annexure A10 cannot be put into force pending final hearing of OA. In such

¶38

O.P.(KAT) No. 297/2014

¶39

¶40

circumstances, the reversion of the petitioner ordered in Annexure A10 has to be kept in abeyance.

¶41

We, therefore, dispose of this Original Petition directing that the reversion of the petitioner as ordered in Annexure A10 will stand stayed, until otherwise ordered by the Tribunal or until the OA is finally heard, whichever is earlier.

¶42

sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE.

¶43

sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE.

¶44

Lathakumari S. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lathakumari S. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Manager, Cmm Higher Secondary School Vs the State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Muslim Education Society

Vinod.D. Vs the District Educational Officer & Ors.

Lovely Manoj Vs Anu R.S.

P.v.Rajan Vs K.K.Rajan

Prakash Sarma Vs Rugmini Devi P