IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2010 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1931 WA.No. 362 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.2222/2010 Dated 25/02/2010 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ------------------------- 1. DEEPA.S., LECTURER, COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION, ARKKANOOR,AYOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT, RESIDING AT T.C.3/1088,PULARI, PARUTHIPPARA, MUTTADA (P.O.), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695025. 2. HAREEF A.SALAM, LECTURER, P.M.S.A POOKOYA THANGAL MEMORIAL ARTS & SCIENCE, KOTTAPPURAM, KADAKKAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT, RESIDING AT VILLOOR VEEDU, KADAKKAL (PO), KOLLAM-691536. 3. SAMLA SALIM, LECTURER, MUSLIM ASSOCIATION COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, VENJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, RESIDING AT PLAVILA PUTHENVEEDU, KODAKAL, KODAKKAL PO, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. K.N.RAVEENDRAN CHETTIAR, SENIOR ACCOUNTANT, KVVS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, RESIDING AT AMRUTHAM, PARAKKODE (P.O.), ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, KERALA UNIVERSITY OFFICE, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, KERALA UNIVERSITY OFFICE, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. RETURNING OFFICER, ELECTIONS TO THE SENATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA FOR 2010, KERALA UNIVERSITY OFFICE, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SYNDICATE, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, KERALA UNIVERSITY OFFICE, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE THE VICE CHANCELLOR. 5. THE ALL KERALA PRIVATE COLLEGE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, STAFF COMMITTEE OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL SECRETARY. ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR FOR R1TOR4 ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, FOR R5 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN, AG. C.J. & C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... Writ Appeal No.362 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT Raman, Ag. C.J. This Writ Appeal is against an interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A. No.1894/2010 in W.P.(C) No.2222/2010. In the said I.A. the applicants who are the appellants, sought for stay of further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P14 notification issued by the University in regard to conduct of election to the Senate of the University. Since the crux of the issue regarding the entitlement of unapproved teachers to vote for the election has been considered and decided, the decision, though rendered at interim stage, has got finality. Hence we heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant Sri.George Poonthottam and also Standing Counsel for the University Sri.M.Rajagopalan Nair. 2. In the Writ Petition main prayer is for declaration that teachers in the unaided colleges are to be treated on par with teachers of aided colleges in the matter of their right to exercise their franchise for the W.A. 362/2010 2 election to be conducted in the Senate. We find that the first relief sought for has been granted by this court in an earlier batch of Writ Petitions evidenced by Ext.P8 judgment, which has become final since the appeal preferred therefrom has been dismissed confirming the view expressed in Ext.P8. The second prayer made in the Writ Petition is for direction to include the teaching and non-teaching staff of unaided private colleges affiliated to the first respondent University in the electoral roll of teachers and non-teaching staff for the Senate Election 2010. The prayer as such cannot be granted as held by the learned Single Judge since as per Section 2(27) of the University Act, a teacher is defined as one approved by the University. Therefore, as on the date of the notification only those who are approved teachers will fall within the definition of the term "teacher" as defined in the Act. It has been held so by a Bench decision of this court in RAJENDRAN V. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT reported in 2005(4) KLT 32 and the learned Single Judge has followed the decision while disposing of the I.A. A decision of the co-ordinate Bench is binding on us. So long as the teachers are not approved, they will not fall within the definition W.A. 362/2010 3 and, therefore, they may not be eligible to vote in the election to the Senate. 3. However, the learned counsel Sri.George Poonthottam appearing on behalf of the appellants contended that even after Ext.P8 judgment, the University did not take any steps in the matter of grant of approval and the delay in granting approval or taking steps for the same cannot be a ground to deny the teachers who are otherwise entitled for approval, to exercise their franchise in the election. The question as to whether persons who are otherwise entitled for approval has been denied such approval is matter to be considered independently, if such an issue is raised with necessary grounds urged in the Writ Petition. Since as of now no such challenge is made, the argument as raised now cannot be taken note of in deciding as to whether non-approved teachers and non-teaching staff for that reason alone be entitled to exercise their franchise. The learned Single Judge has only decided that those persons who have not yet been approved by the University as on the date of the notification, are not entitled to vote in the election scheduled to be held to the Senate of the University. However, since W.A. 362/2010 4 the very Writ Petition is pending, it is still open to the petitioners, if so advised, to incorporate the additional prayer, if otherwise entitled to. As at present we do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, Writ Appeal is dismissed. P.R.RAMAN Acting Chief Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms