Allowed

Usha S.S v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Nov 2018WP(C)/115/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed a writ petition seeking revised non-compounded increments for the petitioner based on UGC norms, directing respondents to process the claim within two months and disburse monetary benefits within a further two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to grant revised non-compounded increments and salary step-up within two months and disburse benefits within a further two months.

Usha S.S Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No.115 of 2017

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

USHA S.S., AGED 47 YEARS, W/O. SUDHEER, AISWARYA, T.C.55/285, AMRUTHA NAGAR, KAIMANAM,PAPPANAMCODE PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAMPIN-18 NOW WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOROF BOTANY IN S.N.COLLEGE, VARKALA

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.M.S.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.

¶11

2 DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶12

3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, KOLLAM-691001.

¶13

4 UNIVERSITY GRANT COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NEW DELHI-110002.

¶14

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.NISHA BOSE BY SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, STANDING COUNSEL

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No.115 of 2017 2

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The petitioner entered in service as Assistant Professor on 09.06.2008. Her prayer is that she should be given revised rate of non compounded increments with effect from 01.09.2008. In fact, similar issue was decided by this Court in W.P.(C) No.22656/2018 dated 17.10.2018. The judgment in the said writ petition reads as follows:

¶19

“The petitioners entered the service of S.N.College, Palakkad and M.E.S. Kalladi College, Mannarkad, as on 1.2.1990 and 3.3.1986 respectively. They claim that they have acquired Ph.D. They submit that they were given two advance increments. However, they were denied benefits flowing out of the University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2010.

¶20

The petitioners' main prayer is for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to grant revised rate of three non compounded increments in the light of the UGC norms. They are also having a prayer to step up their salary at par with that of their juniors. Their case is that the challenge of similarly situated persons were considered by this Court in W.A.No.488/2017. It is also stated that in the light of the directions in above judgment, the Government issued an order as G.O. (Rt).No.1691/2018/HEDN, dated 11.9.2018. Ext.P11

¶21

WP(C).No.115 of 2017 3

¶22

is the said order.

¶23

In view of the facts and circumstances, there shall be a direction to the second and third respondents to take a decision in the matter after adverting to the above government order as also the directions in the judgment in W.A.No.488/2017 within a period of two months after notice to the petitioners. If the petitioners' request is allowed, the monetary benefits shall be disbursed without any delay within a further period of two months.

¶24

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶25

The similar issue was considered by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.488/2017. Therefore, the petitioner's claim shall be considered by respondents 2 an 3 in the light of the writ appeal judgment in W.A.No.488/2017 as well as in the light of G.O.(Rt).No.1691/2018/HEDN, dated 11.09.2018 within a period of two months after notice to the petitioner. Monetary benefits shall be disbursed to the petitioner without any delay, at any rate, within a further period of two months.

¶26

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

WP(C).No.115 of 2017 4

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶33

EXHIBIT P1:	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT REGULATION.	PORTION OF THE SAID
EXHIBIT P2:	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS)	NO.597/2013/H.EDN DATED
	3.9.2013.
EXHIBIT P3:	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT	DECISION IN (2009) 3 SCC 94.

¶34

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL.

¶35

P.A.TO JUDGE

¶36

Usha S.S v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usha S.S 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nagle Vidhya Bhavan Vs State of Kerala

Sheeba Singh G.J Vs State of Kerala

V.P. Devassia Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Bindu M.P. Vs Kannur University

T.K.M.Institute of Management Vs University of Kerala

Faizal P Vs Kannur University