IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 25TH BHADRA 1930 W.P(C).No. 25903 of 2008(H) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- DR.N.RAVEENDRAN, SREERAGOM, CHATHANOOR P.O, KOLLAM 691 572, FORMERLY PRINCIPAL,S.N.COLLEGE, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJU K.MATHEWS RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION TRIVANDRUM. 2. MANAGER, S.N.COLLEGE, KOLLAM. 3. PRINCIPAL, S.N.COLLEGE CHENGANNOOR. 4. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION KOTTAYAM. 5. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION KOLLAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. A.J. VARGHESE SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.25903/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.2/SNT/1971 DATED 5.10.1998 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.A.II/A-2/3359/1998 DT 1.8.05 OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT. EXT.P3: A TRUE COPY OF G.O.P.171/99HEDN DATED 21.12.1999 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA. EXT.P4: A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 19.9.2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.F2.2210/05 DATED 21.3.2005 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.G.1/2(a)/4/05-06 DT 2.6.2005 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: A TRUE COPY OF ONE SUCH REPRESENTATION DATED 8.6.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 25903 OF 2008 H ==================== Dated this the 16th day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that he worked as Lecturer in different grades under the 2nd respondent and was finally appointed as Principal by Ext.P1, which was also approved by the University by Ext.P2. Subsequently, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and finally he was dismissed by order dated 25/3/2004. In the meanwhile, by Ext.P3 order dated 21/12/99, the Government implemented UGC Scheme w.e.f. 1/1/96. Petitioner submits that in terms of the said scheme, he is eligible for fixation in the grade of Principal (Professor Grade). According to the petitioner, he ought to have been given the benefit of Ext.P3 for the period he had worked. 2. It is stated that when this claim was taken up with the 2nd respondent, the 3rd respondent in turn retransmitted the service book of the petitioner to the 2nd respondent, as per Ext.P6. Thereafter, nothing has been heard in this matter. In view of this, the petitioner submitted Ext.P7 before the 1st respondent, praying that he be given fixation as claimed by him extending the benefit of Ext.P3, for the period he had worked as WPC 25903/08 :2 : Principal under the 2nd respondent. Even to Ext.P7, it is complained that there is no response. It is in this background, writ petition has been filed. 3. Facts being as above, at this stage, in my view, all that is needed is to direct the 1st respondent to direct and consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 if the same has been received and is pending. This shall be done by the 1st respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp