IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 11827 of 2010(C) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ SUJATHA.R.E, LECUTURER IN LOGIC, DEPARTMENT OF LOGIC, ST.TERESA'S COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIAT EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,ERNAKULAM. 3. THE MANAGER,ST.TERESA'S COLLEGE, P.B.NO.1013,ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 011. 4. THE PRINCIPAL,ST.TERESA'S COLLEGE, P.B.NO.1013,ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 011. 5. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE R5 BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI, SC, M.G.UTY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.11827/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER NO.STC/AP/TS /4/96 DTD. 29.7.1996. P2:- COPY OF THE APPROVAL ORDER NO.2079/AC.BB/12/2009/ACAD DTD. 15.5.2009. P3:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEARING NO.D1/5122/09 DT. 27.1.2010. P4:- COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 28.6.2008. P5:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 28.7.2006 IN WPC. 5533/2006. P5(a):- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 23.9.2008 IN WPC. 17358/08. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.11827/2010-C ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner who is working as Lecturer in Logic (Senior Scale), in St.Teresa's College, Ernakulam is aggrieved by Ext.P3 communication issued by the Deputy Director of Education objecting the grant of senior scale. 2. Petitioner was initially appointed as Lecturer in Logic in the above College as evident from Ext.P1 appointment order. Later, she was regularised and even after the delinking of Pre-degree, she was retained by the Management there. The petitioner obtained M.Phil Degree in the year 1992 and became eligible for grant of Senior Scale in 2001. She had availed Leave Without Allowance in the year 2003 and after cancelling the same, she rejoined duty in 2006. 3. The petitioner was promoted as Lecturer (Senior Scale) in Logic, with effect from 29/07/2001, as per order dated 29/09/2008 and the proposal was approved by the University as evident from Ext.P2 dated 15/05/2009. This is the background of the case. W.P.(C). No.11827/2010 -:2:- 4. In the affidavit filed by the Deputy Director of Education, the objection taken is that the petitioner is continuing as excess Lecturer after delinking of the Pre-degree and hence, placement cannot be granted to the petitioner. It is also stated that the matter that excess Lecturers appointed against pre-degree category are eligible for placements are to be decided at the Government Level. 5. The petitioner is granted Senior Scale based on U.G.C Scheme. Evidently, the initial appointment of the petitioner as Lecturer in Logic was approved as per Ext.P1 and the placement of the petitioner in Senior Scale Lecturer in Logic has also been approved by the University. 6. Therefore, the question is whether the third respondent can raise any objection with regard to the disbursement of monetary benefits. Actually, a Lecturer is entitled for Senior Scale on completion of five years service after he/she obtains M.Phil Degree and six years in other cases. Herein, the petitioner has completed five years after obtaining M.Phil Degree. Therefore, she became entitled for Senior Scale which is duly granted by the University. The objection is taken with regard to continuance, on delinking of Pre-Degree. Evidently, the same cannot affect the rights of the petitioner as the appointment as well as the grant of senior W.P.(C). No.11827/2010 -:3:- scale has been approved by the University. Going by the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent also no objection is seen taken with the University in the matter. Therefore, in the light of the decision of the Division Bench in Shalini Rachel v. Manager, Christian College, [2007 (3) KLT 355] the Government and the Department cannot raise objections in the matter once the approval has been granted by the University. 7. For all the above reasons, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P3 is quashed. There will be a direction to the Deputy Director of Education to countersign all the bills forwarded by the Principal and disburse monetary benefits within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms