IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 18TH DECEMBER 2008 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 30489 of 2004(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- E.V.NARAYANA PANICKER, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER (RTD.), PLOT NO.18, SREENAGAR, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. DR.K.P.KYLASANATHA PILLAY SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE SRI.T.P.DEYANANTHAN SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), KERALA, P.B.NO.5607, M.G. ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SHRI.T.T.MOHAMOOD, GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R2 & 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.30489/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(MS) NO.125/99/H.Edn. DATED 07/10/1999. P2 : COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 23/04/2002 ISSUED BY AGRO ECONOMIC RESEARCH CENTRE. P3 : COPY OF ORDER NO.UGC.Cell.III(i)4556/02/Coll.Edn. DATED 15/05/02 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P4 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 26/12/2002 ISSUED BY AGRO ECONOMIC RESEARCH CENTRE TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P5 : COPY OF ORDER UGC Cell.III(I)14566/02/Coll.Edn. DATED 13/08/2003 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P6 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18/08/2003 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P7 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.G.E.23/E/804 DATED 21/11/2003 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P8 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.GE.26/E/1180 DATED 04/02/2004 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P9 : COPY OF THE ORDER UGC.Cell.III(I)/14566/02/Coll.Edn. DATED 07/01/2004 ISSUED by the 3RD RESPONDENT. P10 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16/02/2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P11 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.UGC.Cell.3(1)14556/03/Coll.Edn. DATED 06/04/2004 ISSUED by the 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P12 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATI0N DATED 06/06/2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P13 : COPY OF the COMMUNICATION NO.UGC.Cell.3(1)/14566/02/Coll.Edn. DATED 03/11/2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R2(a) : COPY OF THE M.Phil CERTIFICATE R2(b) : COPY OF THE LETTER NO.AERC/2003-04/22 DATED 08/04/2003. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.30489 of 2004 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 18th day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T With effect from 28/12/1985, the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in the Higher Education Services. Prior to his entry in the service, he had rendered service as Junior Research Investigator in Agro Economic Research Centre, Jabalpur. Apart from that, he had also rendered service in Bhopal School of Social Science for the period from 01/07/1980 to 21/12/1985. 2. After joining the Collegiate Education Service, the petitioner was granted senior grade and selection grade reckoning his services during the period from 05/10/1970 to 19/06/1980 as Junior Research Investigator also. Subsequently, that was cancelled by Ext.P9, acting upon the intimation given by the Accountant General. It is Ext.P9, which is under challenge in this writ petition and the petitioner prays for an order requiring the respondents to reckon his aforesaid prior services and grant placement in the selection grade on that basis. 3. According to the petitioner, the services for the aforesaid WP(C) No.30489/2004 -2- period is liable to be reckoned as it was teaching service. On the other hand, the respondents have filed the counter affidavit, in which though they confess that the said period was also reckoned initially, it is stated that the said period was excluded on being alerted by the Accountant General. It is stated that since there was a break of 11 days between the first and second spells of service. It is also stated that the post held by the petitioner at Agro Economic Research Centre was neither equivallent to that of a teacher nor was a teaching post. The respondents have also produced Ext.R2(b), a letter that they have received from the Agro Economic Research Centre, Jabalpur stating that the nature of work of a Junior Research Investigator was to collect primary and secondary data on socio- economic aspect, its scrutiny, tabulation and helping for preparation of draft report of the study. It is on the basis of the material thus available before the respondents, that they concluded that the post held by the petitioner was not a teaching post. It is also to be noticed that according to the respondents, during the period when the petitioner was working as a Junior Research Investigator, he had undergone regular course of M.Phil and have acquired the degree. WP(C) No.30489/2004 -3- This also casts a doubt about the claim of the petitioner that he had continuous service as Junior Research Investigator. 3. Though the petitioner has filed reply affidavit also reiterating that the post was a teaching post, I am not prepared to disagree with the conclusion that was arrived by the respondents for the reason that it was on the basis of the materials collected by them that they have come to the conclusion that the post held by the petitioner in Agro Economic Research Centre was not a teaching post. Since the decision is based on the materials that were available and as there is no material to conclude otherwise, the decision taken by the respondents is not a perverse one, warranting interference by this Court. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg