Allowed

Loveja George v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Dec 2017WP(C)/34227/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that a petitioner's approved service as UPSA entitles her to salary in that scale even if a subsequent HSA appointment proposal was rejected. The petition was allowed, directing the respondents to pay salary and allowances.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of entitlement to UPSA scale salary; direction to disburse pay and allowances from 01.06.2017 including December salary within two months.

Loveja George Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 34227 of 2017 (C)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

LOVEJA GEORGE, AGED 41 YEARS, WIFE OF RENI P.THOMAS, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MALAYALAM), HOLY FAMILY HIGH SCHOOL, PARAMPUZHA, P.O.PERUMBAIKADU, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 686 016.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

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

¶11

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.

¶12

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

¶13

4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

¶14

5. THE CORPORATE MANAGER, CORPORATE MANAGEMENT OF SCHOOLS, ARCH DIOCESE OF CHANGANACHERRY, CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 101.

¶15

BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

WP(C).No. 34227 of 2017 (C)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIO -------	NER(S)' -------	EXHIBITS ---------
EXHIBIT	P1	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 03.06.2013 AND APPROVAL THEREON.
EXHIBIT	P2	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 02.06.2014 AND APPROVAL THEREON.
EXHIBIT	P3	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 01.06.2017.
EXHIBIT	P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1/4220/2017/L.DIS. DATED 06.07.2017 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P5	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 17.10.2017.
EXHIBIT	P6	TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.23323/J1/89/G.EDN. DATED 06.11.1989.
EXHIBIT	P7	TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER 2017-2018 DATED 12.07.2017.
EXHIBIT	P8	TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF STATEMENT AS ON 01.06.2017 OF THE SCHOOL.
EXHIBIT	P9	TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.32746/JI/92/G.EDN. DATED 16.7.1992 OF THE GOVERNMENT
RESPOND -------	ENT(S)' -------	EXHIBITS ---------
EXHIBIT	R4(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B1/5647/2017/KDIS DATED 17.10.2017
EXHIBIT	R4(B)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1/4017/2017/KDIS DATED 30.10.2017
EXHIBIT	R4(C)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1/7755/2017/KDIS DATED 31.10.2017

TRUE COPY

P.S. TO JUDGE

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶25

W.P.(C) No.34227 OF 2017

¶26

Dated this the 5^th day of December, 2017

¶27

J U D G M E N T

¶28

The prayers in this writ petition are as follows:

¶29

“i. declare that the petitioner is entitled to get lower scale salary from 01.06.2017 onwards in view of Exhibits P4 and P6.

¶30

ii. issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the Respondents to disburse the pay and allowances to the Petitioner regularly in the lower scale salary so long as Exhibit P2 is alive, forthwith.”

¶31

The petitioner contends that she had been appointed as UPSA in S.B.H.S School, Changancherry in Kottayam District under the management of the 5^th respondent, Corporate Manager with effect from 3.6.2013 to 3.6.2013 to 31.12.2014 and the appointment was approved. Later, the petitioner was appointed in a regular vacancy of UPSA with effect from 2.6.2014 by Ext.P2 order. The said appointment was also approved. Later, the petitioner was appointed as H.S.A (Malalayalam) with effect from 1.6.2017 in a transfer vacancy. It is stated that the the said appointment has not been approved. The petitioner contends that since her regular appointment as UPSA with

¶32

W.P.(C) No.34227 OF 2017 2

¶33

effect from 2.6.2014 by Ext.P2 order has been approved, she will be entitled to salary in the scale of pay applicable to UPSA. The petitioner contends that pursuant to the rejection of the approval of the petitioner's appointment as HSA (Malayalam), the petitioner has not been paid any salary at all.

¶34

The 4^th respondent has filed a counter affidavit contending that the petitioner's appointment as HSA (Malayalam) was against the transfer vacancy of one Sr. Elsamma Thomas who was transferred to the S.H.H. School Pangada, Kottayam. It is stated that the said transfer was irregular since all vacancies in the S.H.H School, Pangada should have been filled up by appointing teachers available under Rule 43 or Rule 51A of Chapter XIV A, KER. It is stated that the proposal for approval of appointment of the petitioner as HSA (Malayalam) with effect from 1.6.2017, was rejected and this was the reason for the refusal to grant salary to the petitioner.

¶35

I have considered the contentions advanced. It is not in dispute that Ext.P2 appointment of the petitioner as UPSA in a regular vacancy with effect from 2.6.2014 stands approved. Even though, the proposal for approval

¶36

W.P.(C) No.34227 OF 2017 3

¶37

of appointment of the petitioner as HSA (Malayalam) with effect from 1.6.2017 is rejected that would not disentitle the petitioner from claiming salary in the post of UPSA in which she has clear approved service.

¶38

In the light of Ext.P2 appointment order and the endorsement of approval thereof, I am of the opinion that the petitioner would be entitled for payment of salary in the scale of pay of UPSA. It is so declared. The respondents are directed to disburse the pay and allowances to the petitioner in the scale of pay of UPSA without any further delay, at any rate on or before 1.1.2018 along with the salary for the month of December. The arrears due to the petitioner in the scale of pay applicable to UPSA from 1.6.2017 shall be calculated and disbursed to her within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment .

¶39

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶42

sab

Loveja George v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Loveja George 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Divya Babu Vs Dr. Balachandran P.V.

M.V. Muraleedharan Nair Vs Kerala Advocate Clerks' Welfare Fund Committee

Manoharan v. Vs State of Kerala

K.M.Dhanya Vs the State of Kerala

Dr. Roy A.O Vs the Secretary, Higher Education Department

Sajith.T.a Vs State of Kerala