IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 16TH MAGHA 1930 OP.No. 28202 of 2002(G) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. JIJI MAMMEN, HEADMISTRESS, M.M.A.M.T.L.P. SCHOOL, KAVIYOOR, THIRUVELLA. 2. ROSAMMA THOMAS, HEADMISTRESS, M.T.L.P. SCHOOL, KIZHAKKEMUTHOOR, KUTTAPPUZHA P.O., THIRUVELLA. 3. JESSY MARY THOMAS, HEADMISTRESS, M.T.L.P. SCHOOL, EDAPPAVOOR, KOTTATHOOR. 4. MARIAMMA GEORGE, HEADMISTRESS, M.D.L.P. SCHOOL, THAZHATHANGADY, KOTTAYAM. 5. P.K. ANILA, HEADMISTRESS, D.V.H.L.P. SCHOOL, KANJETTUKARA. BY ADV. SRI.T.S.JOHN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PATHANAMTHITTA AT THIRUVELLA. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOTTAYAM. 5. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, VENNIKULAM. 6. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVELLA. 7. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MALLAPPALLY. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- O.P.No.28202 of 2002 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT In this Writ Petition, the petitioners challenge the validity of Sub Rule (1) of Rule 1 of Chapter XXVI of the Kerala Education Rules stipulating 15 years' service for getting the scale of pay of the Headmasters. Sub Rule (1) of Rule 1 of Chapter XXVI was substituted with effect from 1.6.1973 by G.O. (P) No.136/88 G.Edn.8.9.88 published in the gazette dated 15.9.1988. The substituted Rule provides that “the Headmaster of an aided lower primary school or the Headmaster of an aided upper primary school shall be given the scale of pay applicable to the Headmaster of Government school only if he has put in a minimum of 15 years continuous service as Teacher in schools recognised by the Department”. A Division Bench of this Court in a batch of Writ Petitions, disposed of on 2nd September 2003, (O.P.Nos.12800 of 2000 and connected cases) upheld the validity of the amendment. The contention raised by the petitioners therein that the decision of the Full Bench in Indira vs. State of Kerala (1998(2) ILR Kerala 771) was applicable, was also repelled by the Division Bench. The Division Bench held thus: OP No.28202/2009 2 “In view of the above discussion, we hold that : (i) the provisions in Rule 1 of Chapter XXVI of KER as amended by G.O.(P) No.136/88/G.Edn. Dated 8.9.1988 is valid. It is not discriminatory or unconstitutional. (ii) The judgment in O.P.No.27056 of 2001 is not correctly decided. (iii) Rule 1 of Chapter XXVI of KER is not applicable retrospectively and those headmasters who were appointed prior to 8.9.1988 are entitled to the scale of pay of headmasters even if they are not having 15 years service as held by the Full Bench in Indira's case (supra). (iv) Headmasters in private aided schools and government schools are entitled to parity in pay and allowances as held by the Full Bench following the observations of the Apex Court in State of HP vs. HP State recognized and Aided Schools Managing Committees and others ((1995) 4 SCC 507). Government will be free to adjust the excess salary given on the basis of interim orders of this Court to the headmasters who were promoted after 8.9.1988 from their future salary in easy instalments.” 2. In view of the decision of the Division Bench referred to above, the challenge against Rule 1 of Chapter XXVI KER is unsustainable. However, it is made clear that if the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of the last paragraph of the judgment of the Division Bench, they shall be provided the same benefit. The Original Petition is closed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl