IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY TUESDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1932 WA.No. 163 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.26394/2005 Dated 07/04/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): 5TH RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C) ------------------------------------------- THE MANAGER, HEDDARI AIDED UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, BAYAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.N.KUTTAN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 & 6 IN THE W.P.(C) ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JAYARAM, S/O.NARAYANA BHAT, RESIDING AT PELATHDKA HOUSE, PEON, HEDDARI AIDED UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, BAYAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, STATE OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KASARAGOD. 5. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATION OFFICER, KASARAGOD. 6. HEADMASTER, HEDDARI AIDED UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, BAYAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. R1 BY ADV. SRI. KODOTH SREEDHARAN R2 TO R5 BY G.P. SMT. T.B. RAMANI THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/03/2011, ALONG WITH WA NO. 1055 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W.A. No. 163 of 2011 & W.A. No. 1055 of 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Writ Appeals are filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge directing payment of arrears of salary to the petitioner in the WPC, who is the first respondent in the Writ Appeals. There is further direction to the Government to recover arrears of salary paid by the Government to the first respondent from the appellant, who illegally kept the first respondent out of service. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellants, counsel appearing for the first respondent, and Government Pleader. 2. Appellant in WA No. 163 of 2011 is the manager of the School of the first respondent, who was appointed as Peon on 1.2.2000 by the then Manager of the School. There was dispute on management and on appellant becoming manager, he removed the first respondent illegally and substituted the first respondent with the appellant in 2 W.A.No. 1055 of 2010 as a Peon in his place. However, first respondent's appointment was approved by the Director of Public Instruction vide order dated 11.5.2001 which was confirmed by the Government vide order dated 11.10.2002. Even though there has been litigation, it is the admitted position that first respondent's appointment as Peon is confirmed by all the educational authorities and first respondent is reinstated in service. The question that arose is whether the Government was justified in denying him salary for the period he was kept out of service by the appellant, that is for the period from 1.7.2000 to 3.12.2003. Government vide Ext.P12 order treated this period as non-duty of the first respondent without forfeiture of his past service and the consequence of this order is that the first respondent, who was illegally removed by the appellant and kept out of service, was denied salary for the period f rom 1.7.2000 to 3.12.2003 for no fault of his. The learned single Judge held that the appellant illegally removed and kept the first respondent out of service and therefore Government after paying salary should recover the salary from the Manager. The case of the appellant in W.A.No. 1055 of 2010 is that he 3 was appointed as Peon in the School after removal of the first respondent and he worked as Peon from 18.7.2000 to 3.1.2003. Of course, since the removal of the first respondent was found to be illegal, and his service was regularised, the appointment of appellant in W.A.No.1055 of 2010 in that vacancy was irregular. However, taking into account the service rendered by him as Peon and since problems are created by the Manager who removed the first respondent appointed by the previous Manager and since his appointment was approved by statutory authorities, we feel relief granted by the learned single Judge should be modified and Writ Appeals are disposed of with the following direction. The Headmaster of the School will issue pay-in- slip to the first respondent within two weeks from now for the arrears of salary due to the first respondent for the period from 1.7.2000 to 3.12.2003 which will be paid by the State within a period of one month from the date of submission of pay-in-slip. The appellant-Manager will deposit the entire arrears of salary payable to the first respondent within a period of three months from now, and from out of the amount so deposited State will pay 50% thereof towards wages payable to the 4 appellant in WA No. 1055 of 2010 within a period of one month thereafter. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (BHABANI PRASAD RAY) Judge. kk 5