IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2010 / 30TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 24852 of 2009(B) PETITIONER(S) : 1. V.R.RAJALAKSHMI, TEACHER FELLOW, FACULTY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME X PLAN, LECTURER(SELECTION GRADE) IN ENGLISH, S.N.COLLEGE, CHEMPAZHANTHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. REELA VIJAYAKUMAR, TEACHER FELLOW, FACULTY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME X PLAN, LECTURER(SELECTION GRADE) IN ENGLISH, S.N.COLLEGE FOR WOMEN, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN SMT.NITA.N.S. RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, S.N.COLLEGE, CHEMPAZHANTHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, S.N.COLLEGE FOR WOMEN, KOLLAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU, SC, S.N.TRUST FOR R3,4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SANDESH RAJU FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 24852/2009. ------------------------------------------------------------------ EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF GOVT. ORDER DT. 2-1-2006. EXT.P2 GOVT. ORDER DT. 1-3-2006. EXT.P3 LETTER DT. 1-8-2006. EXT.P4 LETTER DT. 25-1-2007. EXT.P5 COMMUNICATION DT. 3-11-2006. EXT.P6 COMMUNICATION DT. 15-7-2007. EXT.P7 LETTER DT. 18-7-2009. EXT.P8 LETTER DT. 27-6-2009. EXT.P9 REPRESENTATION DT. 4-4-2009. EXT.P10 REPRESENTATION DT. 23-11-2008. TRUE COPY P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 24852 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 20th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are Lecturers (Selection Grade) in English, working in S.N. College, Chempazhanthy and S.N. College for Women, Kollam. By Exts. P1 and P2, the petitioners have been deputed to undergo Faculty Improvement Programme sponsored by the University Grants Commission, whereby teachers of Government and Aided Colleges are given deputation benefit for undergoing M.Phil and Ph.D courses, during which period they would continue to receive salary in the post of Lecturers (Selection Grade) and the salary paid by the Government to the substitute teachers appointed in their place would be reimbursed by the UGC. Since the petitioners could not complete the course within the deputation period originally granted, the petitioners applied for extension. That extension was approved by the UGC. But, by Ext. P7 and P8, the State Government refused to grant extension on the ground that the deputation was sanctioned with the specific condition that no further extension would be granted. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging Exts. P7 and P8. 2. The contention of the State is that although the UGC would reimburse the salary to be paid to the substituted teachers, the salary of the petitioners would have to be borne by the Government with no corresponding return to the Government. It is also submitted that they have been given deputation benefits after execution of a bond undertaking that they would complete the programme within the period mentioned therein, which period has already expired. According to the learned Government Pleader, the petitioners have no right to get extension of time contrary to the specific clauses agreed to by them in the bond executed by them. The learned Government Pleader therefore argues in support of Exts. P7 and P8. W.P.C. No. 24852/09 -: 2 :- 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. The very object of Faculty Improvement Programme sponsored by the UGC is to enhance the standard of teaching and standard of education in the State. The Government would not lose anything because they are not liable to incur any extra expenses t on account of the petitioners being deputed for Faculty Improvement Programme. The extra expenses necessary for appointing substitute teachers are borne by the UGC. If the petitioners have not completed the Faculty Improvement Programme, then that wold be a national waste since the object of the Faculty Improvement Programme would not be achieved, if they are not permitted to complete the Programme and at the same time the amount spent on them would go waste. By approving the extension requested for by the petitioners, the UGC, who are sponsoring the Facility Improvement Programme, has accepted the fact that further time is necessary for completing the programme by the petitioners. In such circumstances, I am of opinion that there is no justification for the Government to refuse to grant the extension requested for by the petitioners. It is also a fact that in the case of many other teachers, the Government have granted extension of the period of deputation of teachers deputed for Faculty Improvement Programme. Accordingly, Exts.P7 and P8 are quashed. The Government is directed to give approval for the extension requested for by the petitioners and approved by the UGC and release salary due to them for the period of deputation, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/