Partly allowed

Sindu Jones v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Apr 2015WP(C)/27506/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners lecturers sought payment of salary from June 2009 due to a Supreme Court judgment impacting their appointment status. The court directed the college management to approve proposals, the university to decide on appointments, and the government to pay salaries within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directions to approve appointment proposal, decide on appointment, and pay salary from June 2009 within three months.

Sindu Jones Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/19TH CHAITHRA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 27506 of 2009 (G) ----------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S): --------------

¶7

1. SINDU JONES, LECTURER IN PHYSICS, BASELIUS COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM-1. 2. LINJU ANN JACOB, LECTURER IN PHYSICS, BASELIUS COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM-1. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENT(S): -------------

¶8

1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, KOTTAYAM.

¶11

4. THE CORPORATE MANAGER, MALANKARA ORTHODOX CHURCH COLLEGES, DEVALOKAM KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶12

5. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REP.BY THE REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY KOTTAYAM.

¶13

R,R3 BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER: ADV.SMT.SUNITHA VINOD R5 BY ADV. SRI.VARUGHESE M.EASO, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY R5 BY ADV. DR.P.LEELAKRISHNAN, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY R BY SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 27506 of 2009 (G)

¶16

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶19

EXT OF	P1 THE	: 1^stPETIT	TRUE IONER	COPY OF THE	APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD 07.01.2002
EXT OF	P2 THE	: 2^ndRESPO	TRUE NDENT	COPY OF THE	APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD 07.01.2002
EXT	P3	:	TRUE	COPY OF THE	ORDER DTD 29.10.2005
EXT	P4	:	TRUE	COPY OF the	COMMUNICATION DTD 06.02.2008
EXT Pet	P5 iti	: on(C).NO.	TRUE 482 OF	COPY OF THE 2005	JUDGMENT DTD 12.08.2005 IN Writ
EXT NO.	P6 252	: 9/2005	TRUE	COPY OF THE	JUDGMENT DTD 18.08.2007 IN W A
EXT	P7	:	TRUE	COPY OF the	SALARY BILL
EXT	P8	:	TRUE	COPY OF THE	LETTER DTD 03.08.2009
EXT	P9	:	TRUE	COPY OF THE	REPLY DTD 14.08.2009

¶20

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL

¶21

True Copy/

¶22

P A to Judge

¶23

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶24

=========================

¶25

W.P(C).No.27506 of 2009

¶26

============================ Dated this the 09^th day of April, 2015

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

Petitioners are working as Lecturers in Physics in Baselius College, Kottayam. The relief sought in this Writ Petition is for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to pay salary to the petitioners from June 2009 onwards.

¶29

Petitioners submit that in the light of the judgment in R.P.Nos.101 and 180 of 2008 in W.A.No.2529 of 2005 as confirmed by the Supreme Court, petitioners are entitled for salary from 2009 onwards. I have perused the judgment, this issue is covered in favour of the petitioners.

¶30

In the light of the above, following directions are issued:

¶31

(i) The 4^th respondent is directed to forward the proposal of the petitioners for approval which shall be done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶32

(ii) Thereupon, University shall take a decision on appointment of the petitioners in the light of judgment referred supra.

¶33

(iii) On being approved, third respondent shall pay necessary salary to the petitioners.

¶34

(iv) Petitioners shall produce the relevant judgment before the Principal and Principal shall

¶35

W.P(C).No.27506 of 2009

¶36

¶37

forward the same along with the salary bills to the third respondent.

¶38

(v) The third respondent shall honour such bills after adverting to the above judgments. Needful shall be done within a period of three months.

¶39

The Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.

¶42

Sbna/18/04/15

Sindu Jones v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sindu Jones 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.C.P.Udayabhanu Vs Smt.Nalini Netto

Roshiban N.R. Vs Sri.P.S.Raghukumar

P.T.J.Alen Vs Sri.K.X.Joseph

Gopi Vs Corporation of Cochin

Manager Sree Sethu Parvathy Bhai High School Vs State of Kerala

V.C Jayaprakasan Vs the State of Kerala