IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2011 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 45 of 2011(E) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR.USHA NAIR, LECTURER SELECTION GRADE, DEPARTMENT OF HINDI, ST.TERESA'S COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.BABU VARGHESE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.JOHNSON T. JOHN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE MANAGER, ST.TERESA'S COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-11. 2. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 560. 3. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, VIKAS BHAVAN, P.M.G.JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-11. ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.T.MUHAMOOD FOR R3 & R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.45/11 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF APPROVAL ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT.21.6.2002. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF APPROVAL GRANTED BY THE UNIVERSITY DATED 19.8.2005. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT.22.5.06. EXT.P4: TRUE COPYOF CIRCULAR DT.28.6.08 ISSUED BY THE M.G.UNIVERSITY EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DT.28.8.06 IN W.P.(C)No.5533/06. EXT.P5(A): TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)No. 17358/08 DT.23.9.08. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION WITH THE FORWARDING LETTER OF THE PRINCIPAL DT.23.7.10. RESPONDENTS' EXTS: EXT.R4(A): TRUE COPY OF WORKLOAD REASSESSMENT STATEMENT OF HINDI EXT.R4(B): TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT CIRCULAR NO.28796/D1/03/H.EDN. DT.9.2.04. EXT.R4(C): TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.D5.1949/2010 DT.21.7.10 ADDRESSED TO THE REGISTRAR, MG UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.45 Of 2011-E --------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF MARCH, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein seeks to quash Exhibit P3 order whereby the Deputy Director of Education took the stand that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of Selection Grade. 2. The petitioner was appointed on 22.12.1993 and the said appointment has been approved by the University also. 3. The grant of Selection Grade in the University is as per UGC regulations. Initially the petitioner was granted the senior scale which was approved as per Exhibit P1. This is effective from 22.12.1999. 4. The order Exhibit P2 of the University will show that the Selection Grade granted to the petitioner has been approved with effect from 22.12.2004. 5. The petitioner relies upon Exhibit P4 circular issued by the University which evidences the resolution of Syndicate that for the purpose of promotion of College Teachers, it is not necessary to look into whether they are excess in the W.P.(C)No.45/11 -2- Department, if they are otherwise qualified for promotion. 6. It is pointed out by the 4th respondent in the counter affidavit that as per Exhibit R4(c) letter, the University has been requested to make re-classification in the matter and to revise the date of approval of Selection Grade granted. 7. The University has filed a counter affidavit already. In paragraph No.5 is is stated that the Syndicate of the University has resolved that workload is not a criterion for placement of teachers. Placement is granted in accordance with the UGC norms like length of service, participation in orientation courses, etc. There is no stipulation in the UGC norms that placement cannot be granted to those who are excess in the Department. 8. The learned Standing Counsel for the University placed for perusal, a communication dated 21.2.2011 from the Registrar of the University to the Deputy Director of Education. The said communication reads as follows: “ Considering your letters under reference, the Standing Committee of the Syndicate on affiliation held on 24.1.2011 vide item No.1207 has resolved that as the placement of college teachers are being done as per the norms of W.P.(C)No.45/11 -3- the University Grants Commission and the subsequent Government Orders and the workload is not a criteria for placement, the approval for the promotions already granted to the five teachers, viz. Smt.Laly Paul (Department of Zoology, Newman College, Thodupuazha), Sri Amstrong Sebastian (Department of English, Nirmala College, Muvattupuzha), Sri Philip Augustine (Department of Chemistry, Pavanatma College, Murickassery), Sri Biju Jacob Thomas (Department of Zoology, Marthoma College, Perumbavoor) and Smt.Usha Nair (Department of Hindi, St.Teresa's College, Ernakulam) are in order and hence cannot be reviewed.” 9. In that view of the matter, the stand taken by the Deputy Director of Education cannot be accepted. The Selection Grade is granted in the light of completion of the required number of years after the Senior Scale is granted. The Senior Scale granted to the petitioner has already been approved also. Therefore, the objection raised in Exhibit P3 cannot survive and Exhibit P3 is accordingly quashed. 10. There will be a direction to the Deputy Director of Education to counter sign the salary and arrear bills of the W.P.(C)No.45/11 -4- petitioner with effect from 22.12.2004 as Selection Grade Lecturer and disburse the benefits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is allowed as above. Sd/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn