IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 5449 of 2008(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- MOIDEEN THOTTASSERY, LECTURER IN HISTORY, GOVERNMENT COLLEGE, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT COLLEGE, MALAPPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MOHAMOOD FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.5449/2008 W APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ADVICE LETTER DTD. 27/01/1999 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 30/07/2001 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 22/03/2002 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 1/04/2002 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 8/04/2002 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 18/04/2002 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 20/03/2002 SENT BYTHE PRINCIPAL OF GPM COLLEGE, MANJESWARAM TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 11/05/2002 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 16/08/2002 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.2/01/2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 6/03/2006 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P12: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 18/08/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P13: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 22/12/2007 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.5449/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT By Ext.P2, petitioner was appointed as Lecturer of History and was posted at the Government College Mananthavady. Subsequently, by Ext.P3 order dated 22.3.2002 issued by the 2nd respondent, service of six Lecturers including that of the petitioner were terminated with effect from 1.4.2002. Later, Exts.P4 and P5 orders were issued on 1.4.2002 and 8.4.2002 ordering reinstatement of 4 teachers whose services were terminated by Ext.P3 order, with effect from 1.4.2002. In so far as the petitioner and another teacher whose services were also terminated by Ext.P3 were concerned, by Ext.P6 order dated 18.4.2002, they were also reinstated, but with effect from 1.6.2002. Thus in the service of the petitioner, there WP(c).No.5449/08 2 occurred a break between 1.4.2002 to 1.6.2002. Petitioner submitted Exts.P8 to P12 for getting the break regularized and it would appear that the Director took up the matter before the first respondent. However, by Ext.P13 order, the first respondent rejected the claim of the petitioner, as according to the first respondent the period cannot be treated as duty for any service benefit. Petitioner points out that, following his reinstatement, he was posted at Government College, Manjeswaram and that the Principal of the said college by Ext.P7 dated 20.3.2002 certified that an open vacancy was available in the college. 2. Counter affidavit also shows that the beneficiaries of Exts.P4 and P5 were also accommodated against the open vacancies which were ordered to be revived consequent on the Government letter dated 30.3.2002. If that be so, in view of the fact that an open vacancy was available in Manjeswaram Govt. College where the petitioner was posted following Ext.P6, which is confirmed by the Principal of the WP(c).No.5449/08 3 said college by Ext.P7, there is no reason why the petitioner should be singled out for a differential treatment. For that reason, the petitioner is entitled to the relief prayed for. Accordingly, Ext.P13 order passed by the first respondent will stand quashed and the second respondent is directed to give effect to Ext.P6 with effect from 1.4.2002 with all consequential benefits, except monetary benefits. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 2 months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. WP(c).No.5449/08 4