IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2011 / 11TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 16816 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BINDU CLEATUS, HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER (MATHEMATICS), H.S.S OF JESUR, KOTHAD.P.O, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR SMT.SUSHYA RAJAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE ARCHDIOCESE OF VERAPOLY, (THE CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY) ST. ALBERTS HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI -18, REPRESENTED BY ITS CORPORATE MANAGER. 5. THE MANAGER, ST. PAUL'S COLEGE, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 6. THE MANAGER, H.S.S OF JESUS, KOTHAD.P.O, KOTHAD, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.RANI DIOTHIMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 16816 of 2009(V) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER REF.SPC/102/TS DT.3/9/1996 ISSUED BY THE MANAGER, ST.PAULS COLLEGE, KALAMASSERY, TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.23/09/1999 CMP 39371/99 IN OP 17564/98 PASSED BY THIS COURT EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.27/07/2001 CMP NO.25677/2001 IN OP NO.17564/98 PASSED BY THIS COURT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO SPC/135/V.15/7039 DT.28/08/1998 OF THE PRINCIPAL ST.PAUL'S COLLEGE, KALAMASSERY TO THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A55/HSSE/2000 DT.30/10/2000 ISSUED BY THE GENERALMANAGER, OFFICE OF THE CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, VERAPOLY TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ACD.A1/14790/HSE/2001 DT.7/10/2002 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.10/02/2003 IN OP 17564/1998 OF THIS COURT. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE RELIEVING ORDER DT.30/10/2000 ISSUED BY THE MANAGER ST.PAUL'S COLLEGE, KALAMASSERY 683 503 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF GO MS 30/96/H.EDN. DT.12/02/1996 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF GO MS 344/98/H.EDN. DT.29/08/1998 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.A3/521/98/H. DT.21/5/1998 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION. RESPONDENTS' EXTS: NIL ms \\TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 16816 of 2009-V - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2011. JUDGMENT The main relief sought for in the writ petition is for a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Junior Lecturer in St. Paul's College, Kalamassery for the period from 3.9.1996 to 30.10.2000. 2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Lecturer in Mathematics in St. Paul's College, Kalamassery as per Ext.P1 appointment order. There was a challenge against the appointment itself before this Court. During the pendency of the writ petition, a Division Bench of this Court in C.M.P.No.39371/1999 in O.P.No.17564/1998 allowed the prayer of the petitioner to pay salary for the period she was in service. It is averred in the writ petition that even though the matter was taken up before the Apex Court as per S.L.P. No.2430-2432/2000, the same was dismissed confirming the order of this Court. Ext.P3 is the further order passed by the Division Bench in C.M.P.No.25666/2001 in the above writ petition, to pay arrears of salary to the petitioner. 3. With regard to the approval of appointment, when the proposal wpc 16816/2009 2 was submitted, the same was returned and it was resubmitted by the Principal as per Ext.P4 letter. During the period she was continuing as Junior Lecturer, she was selected by the corporate management, for appointment as HSST Mathematics and was finally appointed as per Ext.P5 order which stands approved as per Ext.P6 order. 4. The judgment of the Division bench in the writ petitions filed before this Court with regard to the challenge against the appointment of the petitioner, is produced as Ext.P7, wherein there is a direction to approve the appointments. As no orders were being passed thereafter, this writ petition is filed. 5. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit wherein the stand taken in in para 3 is that the candidate should have the qualification prescribed by UGC, there is no decision by the University and as per the workload two Junior Lecturers were permitted. 6. Shri N. Nandakumara Meon, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that none of the reasons pointed out in the counter affidavit can be accepted. It is pointed out that the petitioner was appointed only for taking classes at Pre degree level and therefore UGC qualification is not required. My attention was also invited to Ext.P9 Govt. Order wherein, in para 4 the qualification prescribed for teachers in the Collegiate Education Subordinate Service for teaching Pre-degree courses in the State, wpc 16816/2009 3 is a Masters Degree in the concerned subject with at least 50% marks or its equivalent and B.Ed. degree. 7. A reading of Ext.P9 order will show that the same is dated 12.2.1996. After referring to the UGC Scheme and the appointment of teachers under the 48% category, the order has been passed prescribing the qualification. Such teachers were known as “Junior Lecturer (Pre Degree)”. Evidently, therefore, the UGC qualifications are not applicable in this case and therefore the said objection cannot be sustained. Apart from that, all these questions were considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Ext.P7 judgment and finally there is a direction to approve the appointment. Matters which have become final, cannot be re agitated by taking similar objections in the counter affidavit. The Division Bench has clearly held that the UGC qualifications were not required which was one of the contentions considered therein. In para 15 of the judgment, it was held thus: “It is now certain that the post to which the petitioners were appointed are not the posts which are to be filled up as per UGC norms. The UGC norms are not applicable to these posts.” Regarding the concurrence of the University also, the following observations in the same paragraph will be relevant: “St. Paul's College invited applications for five posts and as per the selection, the five persons were appointed. Subsequently, it came to know that these posts were not in conformity with University wpc 16816/2009 4 Regulations or Statutes, but are to be considered by the Deputy Director. As per the Norms prescribed for the Higher Secondary Schools only two posts were available for Mathematics. It is in these circumstances that the Original Petitions were filed.” Finally, this Court issued the following directions: “Hence, according to us, the Director of Collegiate Education in consultation with the Management has to give appropriate position to the five persons, who were appointed as Lecturers in Mathematics and approve their appointments.” Therefore, none of the objections raised in the counter affidavit can be sustained. The appointment has to be approved, as the petitioner herein was one of the parties before the Division Bench and the said judgment has become final. 8. Therefore, there will be a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to approve the appointment of the petitioner and grant the monetary benefits for the period she was in service as Junior Lecturer, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is allowed as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/