IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2011 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 32669 of 2007(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHELJI MATHEW, LECTURER (SENIOR SCALE), PAZHASSI RAJA COLLEGE, PULPALLY, WAYANAD - 673 579. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE. 3. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 4. THE MANAGER, PAZHASSI RAJA COLLEGE, PULPALLY, WAYANAD - 673 579. ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UTY. FOR R.3 GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.ANTONY MUKKATH for R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 32669/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD.28.10.98. P2. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.26.3.99 BY R4. P3. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.11.9.01 BY R3. P4. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.3.5.02 BY R3. P5. COPY OF THE GOVT. ORDER DTD.21.12.99. P6. COPY OF THE PLACEMENT ORDER DTD.20.2.06. P7. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.30.12.06 BY R3. P8. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.6.10.07. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 32669 of 2007 ================== Dated this the 9th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was originally appointed in an aided college as a lecturer in a leave vacancy. Subsequently, the petitioner was given regular appointment without any break. According to the petitioner, as per the UGC scheme, the petitioner is entitled to placement in the category of Lecturer (Senior Scale) after six years of service, which period should be computed taking into account his past service in the same college without break in accordance with Ext.P5 Government order. Petitioner's placement after six years taking into account the provisional service as well was approved by the University. But by Ext.P8 order, the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education, Kozhikode, refused to take into account the petitioner's service in the leave vacancy for the purpose of placement. Aggrieved by Ext.P8 order, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs; “i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order calling for the records leading to Ext.P8 and quashing the same. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to pay the salary due to the petitioner in the category of Lecturer (Senior Scale) on the basis of his placement with effect from 28-10-2004 and disburse the arrears of salary due to the petitioner forthwith. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order declaring that the petitioner is entitled to count the service rendered by him with effect from 28-10-1998 for placement in the category of Lecturer (Senior Scale).” w.p.c.32669/07 2 2. The contention of the petitioner is that as per paragraph 6.25 of Ext.P5 Government order, if a lecturer is appointed by a valid process of selection and he/she has completed six years of service after such appointment, the entire period of service is liable to be counted for the purpose of placement as Lecturer (Senior Scale). According to the petitioner, insofar as the service of the petitioner is in the same college and the service in the leave vacancy was continued without break by regular appointment, the entire period of service including the service in the leave vacancy is liable to be computed for such placement. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent, wherein the stand taken is that as per clause 7.1 of Ext.P5 Government order, past service without break can be counted for placement, provided the appointment was not in a leave vacancy of less than one year duration. It is contended that insofar as the initial appointment of the petitioner was in a leave vacancy of less than one year duration, the same cannot be counted for the purpose of placement. 4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 5. Paragraph 6.25, which the petitioner relies upon, reads as follows; “6.25 A Lecturer will be eligible for placement in a senor scale through a procedure of selection, if she/he has: w.p.c.32669/07 3 (i) Completed 6 years of service after regular appointment with relaxation of one year and two years, respectively, for those with M.Phil and Ph.D. (ii) Participated in one orientation course and one refresher course of approved duration, or engaged in other appropriate continuing education programmes of comparable quality as may be specified or approved by the University Grants Commission (Those with Ph.D. degree would be exempted from one refresher course.)” But when the question of counting past service, the said provision has to be read in conjunction with paragraph 7 of Ext.P5, which reads thus; “COUNTING OF PAST SERVICE 7.1. Previous service, without any break as a Lecturer or equivalent, in a University, college, national laboratory, or other scientific organisation, e.g. CSIR, ICAR, DRDO, UGC, ICSSR, ICHR and as a UGC Research Scientist, should be counted for placement of lecturer in Senior Scale/Selection Grade provided that: 7.2 The post was in an equivalent grade/scale of Pay as the post of Lecturer. 7.3 The qualifications for the post were not lower than the qualifications prescribed by the UGC for the post of Lecturer. 7.4 The Candidates who apply for direct recruitment should apply through proper channel; 7.5 The concerned Lecturers possessed the minimum qualifications prescribed by the UGC for appointment as Lecturers; 7.6 The post was filled in accordance with the prescribed selection procedure as laid down by the University/State Government/ Central Government/Institution's regulations; 7.7 The appointment was not ad-hoc or in a leave vacancy of less than one year duration. Ad-hoc service of more than one year duration can be counted provided- (a) the ad hoc service was of more than one year duration; (b) the incumbent was appointed on the recommendation of duly constituted Selection Committee; and w.p.c.32669/07 4 (c) the incumbent was selected to the permanent post in continuation to the ad hoc service, without any break.” Past service means the service put in before regular service. Paragraph 7.7 specifically lays down that for counting past service for placement, the appointment should not have been ad hoc or in a leave vacancy of less than one year duration. It is not disputed that the petitioner's initial appointment was in a leave vacancy. It is also not disputed that the duration of the leave vacancy was less than one year. Therefore, while considering the question of counting the past service of the petitioner for the purpose of placement, application of paragraph 7.7 squarely comes in. Going by clause 7.7, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the past service, which was in a leave vacancy of less than one year duration, counted for placement. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge