Allowed

Laiju Antony v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Nov 2018WP(C)/4701/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala held that pre-resignation service is reckonable for service benefits like higher grade when a teacher joins a subsequent school within eight days, relying on State v. Victoria. The impugned orders were quashed. Monetary benefits must be paid within four months.

What did the court decide?

Quashment of impugned orders; monetary benefits to be granted within four months.

Laiju Antony Vs the 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 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No.4701 of 2016

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

LAIJU ANTONY, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.T.O.ANTONY, LPSA ST.MARYS L.P SCHOOL, MURIKKUMPADAM, RESIDING AT THANNIPILLY HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM, VYPIN, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.M.A.FAYAZ

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM-682 035.

¶13

4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM-682 035.

¶14

5 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, VYPIN, ERNAKULAM-682 502.

¶15

6 CORPORATE MANAGER, ARCH DIOCESE OF VERAOLY, ERNAKULAM 682 018.

¶16

7 HEADMASTER, ST.MARYS L.P SCHOOL, MURIKKUMPADAM, ERNAKULAM-682 502.

¶17

BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.NISHA BOSE

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C).No.4701 of 2016 2

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The short issue in this writ petition is whether pre-resignation of service of the petitioner to join in the subsequent school within eight days of after resignation can be reckoned for service benefits like grant of higher grade.

¶22

In fact, this issue is covered in favour of the petitioner in the light of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in State of Kerala v.Victoria [2018 (4) KLT 325]. In the said judgment, the Division Bench of this Court after adverting to relevant provisions, held as follows:

¶23

“24. A proper evaluation of this issue is certainly underpinned on the afore referred Government Orders and it becomes inescapable that since the benefit given to the first respondent was much after the Government Order of the year 1986 had come into effect, the rigor of that order ought to have been taken into account while doing so. As per the provisions of the Government Order dated 17.07.1986, a break in service for more than one month could not have been normally condoned. This means that where a teacher had pre-resignation service but did not join the second school within a period of one month after resigning from the former school,

¶24

WP(C).No.4701 of 2016 3

¶25

his/her entire period of service prior to that would stand forfeited. Since the 1986 Government Order was issued referring to the Orders dated 24.02.1968, 05.02.1969, 02.05.1973 and 30.09.1974, to which we have already adverted to above, it can only inferentially lead to the position that the terms of this Government Order were intended and designed to override the provisions contained in the earlier orders.”

¶26

In the light of the above judgment, the petitioner is entitled to reckon prior service for all service benefits. The impugned orders are quashed. Necessary monetary benefits shall be given to the petitioner within a period of four months.

¶27

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶33

EXHIBIT	P1 COPY OF THE PETITIONER.	APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 13.6.05 ISSUED TO
EXHIBIT	P2 COPY OF THE PETITIONER.	APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1.8.03 ISSUED TO

¶34

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN BY PETITIONER TO IST RESPONDENT DATED 1.10.13.

¶35

WP(C).No.4701 of 2016 4

¶36

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.45191/43/2014/G.EDN DATED 11.3.15 OF DEPUTY SECRETARY FOR SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT.

¶37

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER DATED 10.8.15. EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE G.O(MS)NO.122/86/G.EDN DATED 17.7.1986. EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 25120 OF 2012 DATED 9.11.15.

¶38

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL.

¶39

Laiju Antony v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laiju Antony 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Dhinu M.R. Vs Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit

Akhil Ravi Vs the State of Kerala

Dr.Rajesh R Chandran Vs State of Kerala

Sali P. Mathai Vs Sri. Ajith Pattel

R. Mehaboob Vs State of Kerala

Antony Cheeku Vs the Commissioner, Land Revenue