Allowed

Dr.T.v.Aravindakshan v. the Kerala Agricultural University

Kerala HC6 Dec 2022WP(C)/2299/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that a final judgment preventing further challenge barred the University from issuing a show cause notice questioning the validity of the petitioner's promotions. The Court set aside the notice and ordered disbursement of salary arrears.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P7 is set aside; respondents directed to forthwith disburse the amount due to the petitioner as directed in Ext.P6.

Dr.T.v.Aravindakshan Vs the Kerala… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 2299 OF 2011

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

DR.T.V.ARAVINDAKSHAN, PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL BREEDING & GENETICS, COLLEGE OF VETERINARY & ANIMAL SCIENCES, MANNUTHY,RESIDING AT H.N.TMC 13/1071,PATTALOMKUNNU, MANNUTHY THRISSUR. BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN SMT.KEERTHI SOLOMON

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 THE KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY VELLANIKKARA, TRISSUR REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR – 680 654. 2 THE REGISTRAR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY,KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY POST,VELLANIKKARA, TRISSUR – 680 654. 3 THE COMPTROLLER KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY,KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY POST,VELLANIKKARA, TRISSUR – 680 654. 4 KERALA VETERINARY AND ANIMAL SCIENCES UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR. (IS SUOMOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 29/2/12 IN WP(C)) BY ADVS. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA,SC SRI.K.P.MUJEEB, SC, KERALA AGRI UNIVER SRI.ROBSON PAUL, SC, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY SRI.M.V.ANANDAN, SC, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

WP(C) NO. 2299 OF 2011

¶12

¶13

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶14

------------------------------

¶15

W.P.(C).No. 2299 of 2011

¶16

Dated this the 06^th day of December, 2022

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The above Writ Petition is filed with the following

¶19

prayers:

¶20

“(a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or appropriate Writs, directions or orders directing the respondents to induct the petitioner to 2006 UGC Scheme to the post of Professor in Rs.37400-67000 pay scale with effect from 27.7.2006 and to disburse the salary and consequential arrears with in a time limit to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶21

(b) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or appropriate Writs, directions or orders calling for the records leading up to Ext.P11 and quash Ext.P7.

¶22

(c) Declaring that Ext.P4 career advancement promotion to the post of Associate Professor in Rs. 12000-18300 with effect from 27.7.98 and the career advancement promotion as per Ext.P5 to the post of Professor in Rs.16200-22400 with effect from 27.7.2006, are valid and sustainable.

¶23

(d) Grant such other relief as this Hon'ble Court deem fit to grant in the interest of justice.”[SIC]

¶24

¶25

WP(C) NO. 2299 OF 2011

¶26

As per Ext.P4, the petitioner was promoted as Associate Professor with effect from 27.07.1998. Thereafter the petitioner was promoted as Professor as per Ext.P5 with effect from 27.07.2006. When the monitory benefits are not received, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.18072/2008. The same was disposed of directing the University to disburse the monitory benefits within a time frame. Thereafter, Ext.P7 show cause notice was issued stating that there is some anomaly in granting earlier promotion to the post of Associate Professor. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

¶27

Heard counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶28

Counsel appearing for the petitioner takes me through Exts.P4, P5 and Ext.P6 judgment. The counsel submitted that Ext.P6 judgment became final and when

¶29

¶30

WP(C) NO. 2299 OF 2011

¶31

there is a clear direction in Ext.P6 judgment to disburse the amount based on Exts.P4 and P5, issuance of Ext.P7 is flouting the directions in Ext.P6 judgment. The learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents on the other hand submitted that Ext.P7 is only a show cause notice. The petitioner is free to submit his explanation to the show cause notice and thereafter the authority will consider the grievance of the petitioner. It is also submitted that Exts.P4 and P5 promotions are against 1996 UGC Scheme.

¶32

This Court perused Exts.P4 and P5 orders. Ext.P4 is an order dated 04.09.2007 promoting the petitioner as Associate Professor. Ext.P5 is an order dated 23.01.2008 promoting the petitioner as Professor. When the monitory benefits were not disbursed, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P. (C)No.18072/2008 and this Court as per Ext.P6 judgment dated 17.10.2008 directed the respondents to pay the amount. It will be better to extract Ext.P6

¶33

WP(C) NO. 2299 OF 2011

¶34

¶35

judgment:

¶36

“While working as an Assistant Professor (Senior Scale) under the respondent University, petitioner was promoted as an Associate Professor by Ext. P3 order dated 4.9.2007. Subsequently, he was promoted as Professor by Ext. P4 order dated 23.1.2008.

¶37

2. What made the petitioner to file this writ petition is that orders authorizing his pay have not been issued. It is seen that this position continued until an interim order was passed by this Court on 17.7.2008 consequent to which the petitioner submits that he is being paid pay at the minimum of the scale as available to Professor.

¶38

3. Evidently, he was promoted as Associate Professor and Professor by Exts. P3 and P4. Necessarily therefore, the respondents are bound to authorize payment of his pay at the scale applicable to him. If it has not been done, they are bound to do the same. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. It is directed that in the meanwhile payment as ordered by this Court on 17.7.2008 will continue.

¶39

Writ petition is disposed of as above.”

¶40

[underline supplied]

¶41

As I stated earlier, Ext.P6 judgment is dated

¶42

17.10.2008. Thereafter, Ext.P7 show cause notice was

¶43

¶44

WP(C) NO. 2299 OF 2011

¶45

issued on 02.02.2009 stating that the promotion given to the petitioner is not proper. I am of the considered opinion that, when Ext.P6 judgment is in force, the respondents can issue Ext.P7 only after challenging Ext.P6 judgment or after filing a review against Ext.P6 judgment. Admittedly, Ext.P6 judgment became final. If that is the case, according to me, Ext.P7 will not stand.

¶46

Therefore , this writ petition is allowed in the following manner:

¶47

i ) Ext.P7 is set aside. ii ) If Ext.P6 became final, respondents will

¶48

disburse the amount due to the petitioner as directed in that judgment, forthwith.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶51

¶52

WP(C) NO. 2299 OF 2011

¶53

¶54

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2299/2011

¶55

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶56

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. (P) NO. 171/99 DATED 21.12.99.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.F.NO.21-10/ 99-PER.IV DATED 19.4.2001.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G.O. (MS) NO. 32/07/AD DATED 19.3.2007.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE GA/C2/35758/04 [VS- 6] DATED 4.9.2007.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER GA/C2/536 /08 [45] DATED 23.1.2008.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.10.2008 IN W.P.[C] NO. 18072/08.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. GA/C2/35758/04[I] DATED 2.2.2009.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 12.2.2009.
EXHIBIT P9	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.PONO. 10651 OF 2009 DATED 30.3.2010.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GA/C2/ 20608/09 DATED 8.7.2010.
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER F.NO.2(3)2009 AP (EDN) DATED 22.9.2010

¶57

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶58

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Dr.T.v.Aravindakshan v. the Kerala Agricultural University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.T.v.Aravindakshan v. the Kerala Agricultural University

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

K.K.Paulose Vs a.T.Paulose

Bismi S. Baby, Vs State of Kerala

Savithri P Vs the State of Kerala

N.Sukumaran Vs Excise Commissioner and Others

Sarasamma Thankappan Vs Secretary to the Government of India New Delhi

Dr.Joseph Mathew Vs the Executive Committee and Others