IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 871 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.3410/2006 dated 18/02/2008 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER IN THE W.P. ---------------------------------------------------------- PRESCILLA CHANDRAMATHY, LECTURER IN ZOOLOGY, CHRISTIAN COLLEGE, KATTAKKADA (ON DEPUTATION TO GOVERNMENT MODEL BOYS' H.S.S.,CHALAI THIRUVANANTHAPURAM). BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS IN THE W.P: -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, KOLLAM. 5. THE PRINCIPAL, CHRISTIAN COLLEGE, KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVACIS BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2008 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.881 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A.Nos.871 & 881 OF 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated 16th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Appellant in these cases had various spells of temporary services in the Christian College, Kattakkada up to 7.2.1993 for a period of four years nine months and 10 days. She had a claim for reappointment as per Section 57(6) of the Kerala University Act. After de-linking of Pre-Degree course, she was deployed as Higher Secondary School Teacher in Government Model Higher Secondary School, Chalai by Ext.P3 order dated 20.10.2001. Her salary was drawn and paid by the Principal of the College as per Government Order, but, after August, 2003 she was not given salary on the ground that she is not in regular service as on the date of de-linking of Pre-Degree and she is not eligible for the benefit of G.O(MS)No.145/2000/H.Edn. dated 5.10.2000. Therefore, writ petition was filed to quash Ext.P6 denying the rights and to disburse her salary from September, 2003 onwards with interest. At the time of de-linking of Pre-Degree course from Colleges, there was ban of appointment for a period of three years. However, regular teachers who were excess and working on 24.4.1997 were deployed to teach in Higher Secondary Schools by order dated 3/7/97. That was further W.A.871 & 881/2008 2 relaxed and Clause 3 of the above order reads as follows: “3. However where teachers, who have been retrenched for want of vacancies and who have already acquired a right on future appointment as on 24.4.97 are available, they may be appointed in such vacancies on a regular basis.” By letter dated 9.7.1999, it was directed to approve the appointments of Junior Lecturers reappointed after 24.4.1997 on the basis of their service prior to 24.4.97 (claim holders). Thereafter, Ext.P7 was issued. Relevant portion of Ext.P7 is as follows: “The excess teaching staff are categorised as follows: (i) The Junior lecturers with M.Sc., B.Ed. Qualification who were appointed as per G.O. Dated, 12.2.96. (ii) Those teachers under 48% category (Pre- degree teachers) not included in the U.G.C. Scheme (iii) The teachers under 52% category included in the U.G.C. Scheme. (iv) Those claim-holders and others who also were appointed after 24.4.97.” W.A.871 & 881/2008 3 It is the case of the petitioner that she was a claim holder as on 24.4.97 and she was correctly appointed in the school. Clause 6 and 7 of the above order read as follows: (6) Protection will be restricted only to those who were in service as on 24.4.1997. (7) All those appointed after 24.4.1997 and continuing as excess staff would be retrenched with immediate effect.” The above order required clarification as to whether persons who got valid claims before 24.4.1997 are entitled to get the benefit. That was also clarified by Annexure A4 order of the Government dated 21.3.2001. The relevant portion is as follows: “Clause 3 of the proceedings of the Empowered Committee reads as second paper stipulates that the teachers who have been retrenched for want of vacancies and who have already acquired a right on future appointment as on 24.4.97 are available they may be appointed in such vacancies on a regular basis.” That shows that benefits of deployment is applicable to all claim holders who acquired right of future appointment as on 24.4.97 and they can be appointed in the vacancies on a regular basis. In fact, the W.A.871 & 881/2008 4 petitioner was appointed in Higher Secondary School and she was working. The Government stand that, since she was not working as on 24.4.1997 though a valid claim holder, she cannot be given salary, cannot be accepted at all. Therefore, we agree with the contentions of the petitioner. Petitioner is entitled to get regular appointment and salary. It is for the Government to give appropriate posting to the petitioner if another P.S.C hand was already been appointed in the post in which she was working. Petitioner has right to get salary as Higher Secondary School teacher from the date she started the service in Higher Secondary School, Chalai as per Ext.P3. Appropriate orders shall be issued by the respondents. Her appointment by Ext.P3 is permanent and she is entitled to continue in service. However, if there is no vacancy in the school she is teaching, Government is entitled to transfer her to another school as per rules. Both appeals are allowed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE tks