IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2009 / 1ST POUSHA 1931 WA.No. 2385 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.7529/2008 Dated 10/08/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S)/THIRD PARTY: ---------------------- DR. P.V.MADHUSUDHANAN, TUTOR, VAIDYARATNAM AYURVEDA MEDICAL COLLEGE, OLLUR, THRISSUR. BY ADVS. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.S.RAJ MOHAN & SMT.J.DEEPTHI ROSE RESPONDENT(S)//PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. DR. K.G.BEENA, LECTURER, DEPT. OF RACHANA SAREERAM, VAIDYARATNAM AYURVEDA MEDICAL COLLEGE, OLLUR, THAIKKATTUSSERY, THRISSUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. THE MANAGER, VAIDYARATNAM AYURVEDA MEDICAL COLLEGE, OLLUR, THAIKKATTUSSERY, THRISSUR. 5. V.S.SUDHA GOPALAN, S/O. V.G.SUKUMARAN, RESIDING AT VAIAKKATTIL HOUSE, EANGADIYOR, THRISSUR. R1 BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. NOBLE MATHEW. R3 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN. R4 BY ADV. SRI. K.R.B. KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE & & SRI. UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL. R5 BY ADVS. SRI.N.SUKUMARAN & SRI.S.SHYAM. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------ W.A.No.2385 of 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this, the 22nd day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant was not a party to the Writ Petition. He sought and obtained leave of this Court and preferred this appeal. The appellant is working as a tutor in the Department of Kaumarabhrutyam. If a post of lecturer is sanctioned in that Department, he is entitled to get promotion. But, in view of the direction issued by the learned Single Judge, the appellant submits, the first respondent herein will be accommodated in that post. To that extent, he is aggrieved by the judgment under appeal. Therefore, he was constrained to file this appeal. 2. The brief facts of the Writ Petition filed by the first respondent are the following: The first respondent submitted that she joined as W.A. No.2385 of 2009 - 2 - tutor in the Vaidyaratnam P.S.Warrier Ayurveda College, Kottakal on 16.8.1991. Ext.P1 is the order appointing her, which was to take effect from19.8.1991. Later, one Kirathamoorthy, working in the Vaidyaratnam Ayurveda College, Thaikkattussery, Thrissur and the first respondent were mutually transferred on the strength of Ext.P2 order of the Government dated 3.11.1994, permitting such transfer. The transfer was ordered to be subject to the approval of the University. It is common ground that the said transfer has been approved by the University. The proceedings of the University in this regard is Annexure 3. When the 13+1 departmental system was introduced in the College, the Principal forwarded a proposal for one post of Lecturer in Kaumarabhrutyam and allotment of the first respondent/ petitioner to that post, taking note of her option. That proposal was provisionally approved by the University as per Ext.P11. Later, the University by Ext.P12 order took the view that the first respondent not being a post graduate in Kaumarabhrutyam, is not entitled to be accommodated in the W.A. No.2385 of 2009 - 3 - Kaumarabhrutyam Department. At present, she is working in the Department of Rachana Sareeram and her P.G. degree is in Salyathantram. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P12 and seeking to quash that order and also praying for consequential reliefs, the Writ Petition was filed. The learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides, did not quash Ext.P12, but the substantial relief sought by her was granted by directing to accommodate her in the post of lecturer in the Department of Kaumarabhrutyam, as and when 13+1 departmental system is implemented in the 4th respondent's college, pursuant to the direction of this Court in W.P.(C) No.20956 of 2006. 3. According to the appellant, the first respondent is not qualified to be appointed in the Department of Kaumarabhrutyam. If such an unqualified hand is brought in, that will block his promotion chances. So, as mentioned earlier, this appeal was filed by him. 4. We heard the learned counsel on both sides. It W.A. No.2385 of 2009 - 4 - is not in dispute that the first respondent does not have P.G. Degree in Kaumarabhrutyam. But, the first respondent would submit, relying on Ext.P5 that, since she joined service on 16.8.1991, which is admittedly before 14.5.1992, that is before the cut off date contained in Ext.P2, she should be treated as qualified. But, the appellant would point out that the first respondent commenced service in the Vaidyaratnam Ayurveda College, Ollur only on 8.11.1994 and therefore, she cannot claim the benefit of Ext.P5. We think, it is a matter which requires decision by the second respondent, University. In view of the above position, we quash Ext.P12. The parties to this appeal, who want to file representations, may file representations before the University, concerning the above point within six weeks from today, along with a copy of this judgment. Upon receipt of those representations, the University shall take a fresh decision on the claim of the first respondent/writ petitioner for accommodation in the post of Lecturer in Kaumarabhrutyam, that may be created while implementing 13+1 departmental system. The University W.A. No.2385 of 2009 - 5 - shall take a decision within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment either from the appellant or the respondents. The judgment under appeal is modified and the Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. Sd/- K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. Sd/- P. Bhavadasan, Judge. DK. (True copy)