IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2009 / 30TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 25077 of 2007(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.SHAJIKUMAR, LECTURER, COLLEGE OF FINE ARTS, TRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI SRI.R.SREEDHARAN NAIR SMT.SABINA JAYAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.DILEEP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 25077 of 2007 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EB1/13425/97 DATED 6.1.99 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.11.02 IN O.P.34696/02 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS)2/2000/H.Edn DATED 11.1.2000 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 4.7.2000 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.7.2004 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(R1) NO.1906/2006/II,Edn DATED 16.12.2006 EXT.P7- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.1.2007 IN W.P.NO.20027/06 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P8- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.1.2007 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS. EXT.P9- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(Rt) NO.415/2007/H.Edn DATED 7.3.2007. (TRUE COPY) P.S TO JUDGE V.GIRI, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No.25077 of 2007 --------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is at present working as Lecturer in Government Fine Arts College, Trissur. He was earlier appointed as Lower Division Clerk, in the Department of Technical Education, on advice by the Public Service Commission. Later he was appointed by transfer as an Art Instructor in the Ravi Varma College of Fine Arts, Mavelikkara, as per Ext.P1 dated 6.1.1999. It seems that Ravi Varma Institute of Fine Arts had been upgraded as a college of Fine Arts as per Government order No.G.O.(MS) No.144/98/H. Edn. dated 4.12.1998. But the order as such did not provide for the existing staff pattern in the Institutes of Fine Arts, which also contemplated the post of Art Instructor. 2. The staff pattern in the College of Fine Arts, on the other hand, is provided for in the Special Rules, as W.P.(C)No.25077 of 2007 :: 2 :: contained in G.O.(P)No.215/88/H.Edn dated 11.10.1988. It is admitted that as per the said Special Rules, the post of Lecturer in the College of Fine Arts is to be filled up by direct recruitment through the Public Service Commission. It is, therefore, that the Director of Technical Education had to report the vacancy of Lecturer in the College of Fine Arts to the Public Service Commission. But, as evidenced by Ext.P3, the Government had granted sanction for creation of two posts of Lecturer in applied Arts in the Ravi Varma College at Mavelikkara. It will have to be recalled at this point of time that the petitioner was functioning as an Art Instructor, he having been appointed as per Ext.P1 dated 6.1.1999. Apparently, the petitioner had requested for absorption as a Lecturer and the Director of Technical Education, as per Ext.P4 dated 4.7.2000 forwarded a proposal to the Government, inter alia, for absorption of the petitioner as Lecturer in Applied Arts in the vacancy likely to be created in future. But since the Special Rules modifying the College of Fine W.P.(C)No.25077 of 2007 :: 3 :: Arts, provided for appointment of Lecturer only by direct recruitment, the Government had to exercise its power under Rule 39 of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, while considering the proposal of the Director, as per Ext.P5. 3. By Ext.P6 order dated 16.12.2006 the Government, after referring to G.O.(MS)No.144/99/H.Edn. dated 12.7.1999 by which the two Fine Arts Institutions at Thrissur and Mavelikkara were upgraded to the status of a College of Fine Arts, took note of the fact that while upgrading the institutions, nothing was mentioned in the matter of the existing staff. Hence the Government observed that, in the said Government order, the teaching staff, who were working in the Fine Arts Institutions in the post of Art Instructor, do not come under the staff pattern of the College of Fine Arts and therefore, the teaching staff in the erstwhile Fine Arts Institutions, who are qualified as per Special Rules, may be appointed in relaxation of method of appointment specified in Special W.P.(C)No.25077 of 2007 :: 4 :: Rules. Therefore, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, the Government directed the Director of Technical Education to appoint the petitioner as a Lecturer in Applied Arts in any of the arising vacancies in any of the Colleges of Fine Arts under the Department of Technical Education. 4. Going by the details given by the Government, the petitioner joined duty as a Lecturer in Applied Arts at Mavelikkara on 7.6.2007 and he has been continuing there. 5. The petitioner then sought for his appointment as Lecturer with effect from the academic year 1999-2000 and for consequential reliefs. Essentially, the claim of the petitioner was that since he had been appointed as Lecturer, on transfer, as per Ext.P1 and the institute had been upgraded as a College of Fine Arts and since he was discharging the duties otherwise discharged by a Lecturer, even with effect from the date of Ext.P1, he should be treated as a Lecturer with effect W.P.(C)No.25077 of 2007 :: 5 :: from the year 1999-2000. He sought for consequential reliefs including promotion as a Professor in Applied Arts and his claim in this regard was considered and rejected as per Ext.P9. The same has been challenged in this writ petition. 6. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Government. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 7. Ext.P6 shows that the Government had relaxed the rules relating to the method of appointment as contained in the Special Rules, for absorbing the petitioner as a Lecturer in Applied Arts in the College of Fine Arts. This was obviously because the Special Rules provided for direct recruitment and the method of appointment to the post of Lecturer in a College of Fine Arts. Such direct recruitment could only be made through the Public Service Commission. But the Government had accepted the proposal of the Director and considering the over all circumstances, had directed that the petitioner be W.P.(C)No.25077 of 2007 :: 6 :: appointed as Lecturer in relaxation of the Special Rules. Obviously, therefore, the petitioner could claim a right to be appointed as a Lecturer only on the strength of Ext.P6 order dated 16.12.2006. The petitioner is a beneficiary of Ext.P6. 8. In the circumstances, he cannot claim the right to be appointed as a Lecturer with effect from a date prior to the date of Ext.P6, let alone with effect from 1999-2000. The claim made by the petitioner is otherwise misconceived and untenable. I find no merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (V.GIRI) Judge sk/ //true copy//