IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2011 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 20705 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SR.THRESIAMMA DEVASIA, SENIOR LECTURER IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, ASSUMPTION COLLEGE, CHANGANASSERY. 2. SARAH MENDEZ, SENIOR LECTURER IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, ASSUMPTION COLLEGE, CHANGANASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.BABU VARGHESE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.JOHNSON T. JOHN SMT.SADHANA KUMARI ESWARI SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 010. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 002. 4. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 560. 5. MANAGER, ASSUMPTION COLLEGE, CHANGANASSERY, PIN-686 101. ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.T. MUHAMOOD FOR R1 TO R3 R5 BY ADV. SHRI BABU VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX EXT.P1-TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER IN WPC 25544/2003 DT.6.11.2003 EXT.P2-TRUE COPY OF DO.DATED 7.1.2004 EXT.P3-TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 10.8.2004 EXT.P4-TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC 25544/2003 EXT.P5-TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR DATED 2.12.1996 EXT.P6-TRUE COPY OF RODER DATED 5.8.2008 EXT.P7-TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 2.8.2008 EXT.P8-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 27.6.2009 EXT.P9-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DAYTED 21.5.2009 EXT.P10-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 2.7.2009 EXT.P11-TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 16.4.2010 EXT.P12-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 7.6.2010 EXT.P13-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 5.3.2010 EXT.P14-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 2.5.2010 EXT.P15-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 18.12.2009 EXT.P16-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.4.2010 EXT.P17-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25.3.2010 EXT.P18-TRUE COPY OF UNIVERSITY ORDER DATED 19.5.2006 EXT.P19-TRUE COPY OF DO. DATED 20.5.2006 EXT.P20-TRUE COPY OF DO. DATED 15.10.2007 EXT.P21-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25.3.2010 EXT.P22-TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 23.9.1999 EXT.P23-TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 15.12.2010 EXT.P24-TRUE COPY OF QUESTION RAISED BY THE 2ND PETITIONERs EXT.P24(A) TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 18.12.2010 EXT.P24(B)-TRUE COPY OF DO. DATED 6.8.2010 // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 20705 of 2010 - K - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of April, 2011. JUDGMENT Both the petitioners are working as Senior Lecturers in Computer Science in Assumption College, Changanassery. They are seeking for a declaration that their placement in the Senior Scale with effect from 29.1.2002 and 24.4.2002 respectively is liable to be approved by the third respondent with all consequential benefits. They seek to quash Exts.P8, P9, P14, P16, P17 and P21. 2. The petitioners entered service as Lecturers in Computer Science in Assumption College, Changanassery on 29.1.1996 and 24.7.1996 respectively. When there was delay in approving their appointment, they approached this Court by filing O.P. No.2398/2003 wherein directions were issued to consider the representations. The Government later rejected the request for sanction of post and approval of appointment which was challenged in W.P.(C) No.25544/2003. During the pendency of the said original petition, the University issued Ext.P3 order by which their appointments were approved with effect from 29.1.1996 and 24.7.1996 respectively. The writ petition was accordingly closed directing the wpc 20705/2010 2 respondents to consider disbursement of the amounts due to them. 3. The petitioners were given placement by the College in terms of the U.G.C. norms. Placements were given after completing 6 years of service as Lecturer Senior Scale and have completed the mandatory refresher courses. These were objected to by the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education and the objections are reflected in Exts.P8 and P9. The Principal of the College later explained the matter as per Ext.P10 communication addressed to the third respondent. Finally, by Exts.P14 and P16 the third respondent requested the fourth respondent University to review the promotion of the petitioners to the Senior Scale. Exts.P17 and P21 are also challenged by them. 4. The University has already replied as per communication dated 15.12.2010, a copy of which has been produced Ext.P23 by the petitioners. In Ext.P23, the University has clarified that promotion of the first petitioner as Lecturer Senior Scale is perfectly in order. Reference is made to the resolution of the Standing Committee in the matter. 5. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and learned Govt. Pleader. 6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submitted that there cannot be any objection to the placement of the petitioners in Senior Scale wpc 20705/2010 3 and the same is perfectly in order. Senior Scale is granted under the U.G.C. norms, on completion of certain number of years and on fulfilling certain other conditions. Both the petitioners have satisfied the same and the University has accordingly granted approval. It is further pointed out that there had not been any objection to the appointment of the petitioners and the appointments have been approved already. Therefore, the present objections cannot be supported. What is pointed out by the second respondent in the counter affidavit is that both the petitioners had not passed Ph.D. or NET. According to the second respondent, the University ought not have granted exemption in the matter. 7. The approval of the petitioners have been already granted by the University. The University is the competent authority to grant exemption from NET qualification. Apart from that, as the appointments have been approved long back, the same cannot be raised as an objection to the placement given. The placement under the UGC norms is totally different. 8. In a like case, I had occasion to consider the matter in the judgment in W.P.(C) No.45/2011. Therein, it was held that “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.” wpc 20705/2010 4 9. Herein, we are concerned with the placement in Senior Scale. The yardstick prescribed by the UGC norms have been fulfilled and there is no objection regarding the same also. Therefore, there cannot be any refusal to grant benefits of the Senior Scale granted to the petitioners which have been approved by the University already. 10. In the light of the above, the petitioners are entitled to succeed in the writ petition and the same is accordingly allowed. The impugned proceedings Exts.P8, P9, P14, P16, P17 and P21 so far as they reject the claim of the petitioners, are quashed. It is declared that the petitioners are entitled for the benefit of Senior Scale. Consequential monetary benefits also will be disbursed to the petitioners along with arrears, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/