Disposed

Jessy George v. Co-Operative Academy of Professional Education (Cape)

Kerala HC3 Aug 2016WP(C)/7125/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner Associate Professor challenged denial of pay band granted to similarly situated incumbents by CAPE executive committee. Court directed competent State authority to consider her representation within six weeks after granting hearing opportunity, without deciding merits.

What did the court decide?

Directing competent State Government authority to consider petitioner's representation regarding pay scale within six weeks after granting hearing opportunity.

Jessy George Vs Co-Operative Academy of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2016/12TH SRAVANA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 7125 of 2013 (M)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

JESSY GEORGE ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR,CMC COLLEGE OF NURSING, COCHIN MEDICAL COLLEGE,KALAMASSERRY,KOCHI.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.BABU CHERUKARA

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. CO-OPERATIVE ACADEMY OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION (CAPE) REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR,CAPE,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶11

2. THE DIRECTOR, CAPE,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶12

3. MEDICAL DIRECTOR, COCHIN MEDICAL COLLEGE,KALAMASSERRY,ERNAKULAM - 683505.

¶13

4. THE PRINCIPAL, CMC,COLLEGE OF NURSING CO-OPERATIVE MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOCHI-683503.

¶14

5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶15

Additional 6th respondent :

¶16

6. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶17

(impleaded as per order dated 27.11.2013 in I.A.No.15750/2013)

¶18

R1,R 2 BY ADV. SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON & SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA SC, CO.OP.ACADEMY OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION R1,2,3,4 BY E.K.MADHAVAN R5 & 6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.V.ELIAS

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C).No. 7125 of 2013 (M)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶23

----------------------EXT-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 31.1.2011 OF THE PETITIONER

¶24

EXT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 17.6.2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶25

EXT-P3 TRUE COPY OF G.O.(P)NO.425/2009/H & FWD DATED 14.12.2009

¶26

EXT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.7.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶27

EXT-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 130TH EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING HELD IN AUGUST,2012

¶28

EXT-P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.9.2012 ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT

¶29

EXT-P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.5.2012

¶30

EXT-P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.12.2011

¶31

EXT-P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.1.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶32

EXT-P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 2.3.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶33

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

¶34

Ext.R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18.03.2013

// True Copy //

rmm

P.A. To Judge

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ---------------------------W.P.(C) No.7125 of 2013

¶39

Dated this the 3^rd day of August, 2016

¶40

In the aforecaptioned writ petition filed on 13.03.2013, it

¶41

has been averred that the petitioner is an Associate Professor

¶42

under respondents 1 and 2 (Co-operative Academy of Professional Education, CAPE) and that her actual pay band is Rs.37,400/- Rs.67,000/- plus AGP of Rs.9000/- and that the same was denied to her but at the same time the said pay band was granted to other similarly situated incumbents under the same institution. The petitioner challenges this as amounting to hostile discrimination and prays that the pay band of the scale of pay of Rs.37,400/-Rs.67,000/-plus AGP of Rs.9000/- together with arrears should be given to her.

¶43

In the light of these facts and circumstances the petitioner has filed the aforecaptioned writ petition with the following prayers :-

¶44

“i) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to implement the decision taken in Ext.P5 and to grant the pay scale of Rs.37,400/- Rs.67,000/- plus AGP of Rs.9000/- to the petitioner together with arrears calculated on the basis of the said scale within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court;

¶45

¶46

W.P.(C)No.7125 of 2013

¶47

ii) To declare that the petitioner is entitled to get the pay scale of Rs.37,400/- - Rs.67,000/- plus AGP of Rs.9000/-;

¶48

iii) To declare that the petitioner is entitled to get the pay scale of Rs.37,400/- - Rs.67,000/- plus AGP of Rs.9000/- with effect from 20.05.2012 the date on which the petitioner acquired 13 years of teaching experience;

¶49

iv) To issue such other orders, directions or writs as may be prayed for and that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit on the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶50

During the course of hearing, Sri.Babu Cherukara,

¶51

learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and Sri.V.Krishna Menon, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent CAPE appearing for respondents 1 and 2 submits that though earlier the 3^rd respondent Co-operative Medical College of Nursing, Kochi was under the control and supervision of the

¶52

respondent CAPE, the same has been taken over by the respondent State Government.

¶53

Sri.Babu Cherukara, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶54

further points out that as per Ext.P5 proceedings dated August,2012, the executive committee of the respondent CAPE had taken the following decision in her favour, which reads as follows;-

¶55

130.4.16 Scale revision of Smt.Jessy George Associate E2 Professor, College of Nursing, CMC, Kochi

¶56

E2-7107/2011

¶57

Resolved that the teaching experience of Smt.Jessy George, Associate professor, College of Nursing, CMC, Kochi shall be counted for placing her in the pay band of Rs.37,400 - 67,000 + AGP of

¶58

¶59

W.P.(C)No.7125 of 2013

¶60

Rs.9000/- with effect from 20.05.2012 if the institutions where she worked are approved by Nursing Council of India/Kerala Nursing Council. She shall be placed in the above pay band only on completion of teaching experience of 13 years in institutions approved by the NCI/KNC. This will be treated as a special case.”

¶61

That pursuant to Ext.P-5, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P-10 representation claiming up the consequential reliefs, by filing the said representation before the Director of the 2^nd respondent CAPE and that the same has been unattended throughout even after taken over of the institution by the State Government. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court may direct the competing authority of the respondent State Government to take a considered decision on Ext.P-10 representation in the light of Ext.P-5.

¶62

Heard Sri.Babu Cherukara, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner, Sri.V.Krishna Menon learned Standing Counsel for the CAPE appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the other official respondents including the State Government. In the facts and circumstances disclosed in the writ petition, it is ordered that it is for the petitioner to file a detailed representation before the competent authority among the respondent State Government for ventilating her grievances more particularly those in relation to

¶63

¶64

W.P.(C)No.7125 of 2013

¶65

Ext.P-5 proceedings and Ext.P-10 representations. This, the petitioner may do so within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and the petitioner will file said representation along with necessary documents like Ext.P-5, Ext.P-10, etc. On receipt of said representation, the competent authority the respondent State Government will take up the same for consideration without much delay and render a considered decision thereon after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner either in person or through her authorised representative, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of such representation along with a certified copy of this judgment. The specific contentions of the petitioner based on Ext.P5 should be adverted to and necessary action, including those for consequential benefits, if any, should be taken by the competent authority of the respondent without much delay as indicated above.

¶66

With the above observations and directions this Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of.

¶67

Sd/-

¶68

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.

¶69

rmm

¶70

// True Copy // P.A. To Judge

Jessy George v. Co-Operative Academy of Professional Education (Cape)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jessy George v. Co-Operative Academy of Professional Education (Cape)

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

Preejith M.P. Vs the Corporate Manager

G.Mohandas Vs Kerala State Warehousing Corporation

C.K.Purushothaman Vs State of Kerala

Simi Rahim P.A. Vs Kerala State Electiricty Board

Bindu S.K Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Prapanchan .K.R Vs Kerala State Electricity Board