Allowed

Aboobacker P. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Nov 2016WP(C)/5263/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that a High School Assistant Master whose lien was shifted to an additionally sanctioned post before the relevant date is entitled to full-time pay scale benefits. The petitioner was directed to continue in service as HSST from the date of initial appointment. Monetary benefits are to be disbursed within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner entitled to continue as HSST from 4.10.2000; full-time benefits under G.O. 351/2004; monetary benefits to be disbursed within three months.

Aboobacker P. Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/30TH KARTHIKA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 5263 of 2012 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

ABOOBACKER P.,

¶8

HSST (JR) ENGLISH, MARKAZ HSS, KARANTHUR, KOZHIKODE-673 571.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.BOSE SRI.VINOD MADHAVAN SMT.NISHA BOSE

¶10

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶11

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

¶12

2. THE DIRECTOR HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶13

3. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE- 673 001.

¶14

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Msd.

¶17

WP(C).No. 5263 of 2012 (G)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶20

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER OF 2000-2001 AND 2001-2002.

¶21

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 11.4.2004. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.7.2010 BY REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, KOZHIKODE.

¶22

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(P) NO.351/2004 GEN. EDU. DATED 20.11.2004.

¶23

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.7.2011 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶24

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 10.2.2012.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶31

W.P(C).No. 5263 of 2012

¶32

Dated this the 21^st November, 2016

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

The prayers in this writ petition are as follows:

¶35

“ i) to call for the entire records which led to the passing of Exhibits P3 and P6 and to quash the same by issuance of writ of certiorari or any other writ order or direction.

¶36

ii) to issue a writ of mandamus compelling the respondent to grant full time pay scale in the post of HSST from 11.7.2011.

¶37

iii) to issue a writ of mandamus compelling the respondent to grant higher grades in the post of HSST.

¶38

iv) to declare that petitioner is entitled to get basic pay of Rs.29860 from 11.7.2011 instead of Rs.26520.

¶39

v) to declare that petitioner is a regular teacher and not a leave substitute and he is entitled to get benefit of G.O. (Rt) 351/2004 Gen Edn dated 20.11.2004.”

¶40

The contention of the petitioner is that he was holding the

¶41

post of HSST (English) in an Aided High School and was appointed on 4.10.2000 as HSST (English) in a leave vacancy. It is stated that in respect of the year 2001-2002, an additional post of HSST (Junior) was sanctioned in the School by Exhibit P1 staff fixation order it is contended that the lien of the petitioner was shifted to the said post of HSST (Junior). He was allowed to continue as

¶42

¶43

WP(C).5263/12

¶44

HSST (English) in the leave vacancy. It is contended that by Exhibit P4 Government order dated 20.11.2004, the Government had directed the grant of full time scale of pay to all Aided Higher Secondary School Teachers appointed till 12.11.2001. The petitioner being a person, whose lien had been adjusted against a regular post of HSST (Junior) with effect from 15.7.2001, claims that he is entitled to the full time benefit on the basis of Exhibit P4 order. Later, when the HSST, who had availed leave, came back and rejoined duty on 10.7.2011, the petitioner was reverted as HSST (Junior) with effect from 11.7.2011. This has been upheld by the educational authorities. This is challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition on the ground that his lien having been shifted to a newly sanctioned post of HSST (Junior) with effect from 15.7.2001, he is clearly entitled to the benefit of Exhibit P4 order and therefore, he is entitled to be retained in service as HSST without any reversion.

¶45

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶46

A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2^nd respondent contending that the petitioner had continued in the leave vacancy up to 10.7.2011 and when the teacher who had availed leave,

¶47

WP(C).5263/12 3

¶48

rejoined duty on expiry of the said leave, the petitioner was reverted as HSST (Junior). It is stated that Exhibit P4 Government order will not be applicable, since the petitioner was initially appointed in a leave vacancy.

¶49

I have considered the contentions advanced on either side. It is borne out by the records that the petitioner was appointed in a leave vacancy of HSST (Senior) in English with effect from 4.10.2000 till the vacancy exists. Later, an additional post of HSST (Junior) was sanctioned in respect of the academic year 2001-2002. The said post can be deemed to have come into effect on 15.7.2001 in view of the Government orders in force. The lien of the petitioner was shifted to the said post, but he was allowed to continue as HSST in the leave vacancy by the Manager. All persons appointed as HSST (Junior) before 12.11.2001 were given full time benefit by Exhibit P4 order. Therefore, the petitioner, who had a lien on the post of HSST (Junior) with effect from 15.7.2001, would also be entitled to be treated as full time teacher by virtue of Exhibit P4 order. The contention raised by the 2^nd respondent that the petitioner's appointment was only against a leave vacancy and that the post he held ceased to exist on the teacher, who was on leave, rejoining duty and therefore,

¶50

WP(C).5263/12 4

¶51

he would be entitled to be retained only as HSST (Junior) with effect from that date, cannot hold good, in view of the specific shifting of the petitioner's lien by Exhibit P2 proceedings of the Director of Higher Secondary Education dated 11.4.2004. Since the petitioner is a person, who held a lien on the post of HSST (Junior), which was additionally sanctioned for 2001-2002, he would be entitled to the benefit of Exhibit P4 Government order.

¶52

In the above view of the matter, the petitioner would also be consequently entitled to continue in service as HSST with all attendant benefits with effect from 4.10.2000, the date of his initial appointment. It is so declared. Consequential orders shall be passed and all monetary benefits shall be calculated and disbursed to the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶53

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶54

ANU SIVARAMAN

¶55

vgs23/11

Aboobacker P. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aboobacker P. 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

P.Ibrahim Vs State of Kerala

Joseph.M.C. Vs State of Kerala

Jasmine Vs the Travancore-Cochin Chemicals Ltd.

Jyotheendranath.D. Vs the State of Kerala

Krishnakumar P.P. Vs State of Kerala

Vijayaghosh S Vs Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd.