IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2008 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23326 of 2007(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ THOMAS K.VARGHESE, SENIOR SCALE LECTUR IN COMMERCE, MARTHOMA COLLEGE, CHUNGATHARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.K.K.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, NORTH ZONE, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., KOZHIKODE. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, MARTHOMA COLLEGE, CHUNGATHARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UTY. FOR R3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.RAVIKRISHNAN FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.23326/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.A.II/B3/312/93 DT 6.7.1993 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.A.II/B3/2134/93 DT 8.2.94 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES (PAGES 1,2,4,6 &10) OF THE ORDER NO.G.A-II/C1/3342/2001 DT 19.9.2001 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.A.II/SPL.CELL/2/2698 B/2001 DT 23.5.2002 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GA-II/SPECIAL CELL.2/2688/01 DT 6.10.2003 WRITTEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.AIII/SPL.CELL/2/2099/04 DT 10.10.2005 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.C3-7657/05 DT 24.5.2006 WRITTEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS PER LETTER NO.GAII/SPL.CELL 2/2099/04 DT 15.9.2006. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GAII/SPL.CELL/2/2099/04 DT 11.1.2007 WRITTEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.C3-7657/05 DT 19.7.2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WRITTEN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TOT HE ACCOUNT GENERAL (A&E), KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DT 22.10.2005. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF the ORDER G.O.(MS) NO.4/08/H.EDN DT 14.1.2008. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 23326 OF 2007 (B) ==================== Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is presently a Selection Grade Lecturer in the Commerce Department of Marthoma College, Chungathara in Malappuram District. He was initially appointed in a leave vacancy for the period from 5/1/93 to 4/2/93. This was approved by the University as per Ext.P1. Subsequently, he was appointed on a regular basis w.e.f. 12/7/93 and that appointment was also approved by the University as per Ext.P2. 2. On completion of 6 years, reckoning broken service rendered by him also, he was placed in the senior scale, by Ext.P4 order w.e.f. 12/6/99. Ext.P4 order was issued on 23/5/2002. Before Ext.P4 was issued, the University had issued Ext.P3 dated 19/9/01, which provides for placement in the Senior Scale and Selection Grade. This order also contains a note that approved service rendered by the teachers will also be reckoned for career advancement even if broken service is of less than one year duration. Obviously in Ext.P4 benefit of the note contained in Ext.P3 was extended to the petitioner. 3. However, the Deputy Director- the 2nd respondent objected to the petitioner's placement in the senior scale and took up the matter with WPC 23326/07 :2 : the University. The University clarified the position by Ext.P5 reiterating the correctness of Ext.P4. Again on completion of 11 years of service, w.e.f. 12/6/04, petitioner was placed in the selection grade as per Ext.P6. That again was objected by the Deputy Director by Ext.P7 on the ground that the service rendered by the petitioner in the leave vacancy cannot be reckoned. This objection was taken up with the University and the University by Exts.P8 and P9 stood by the petitioner's placement in the Selection Grade as well. 4. Despite all this, the Deputy Director returned the service book as per Ext.P10. It is in this circumstances the writ petition has been filed for quashing Ext.P10 and to direct the 2nd respondent to accept the placement of the petitioner in Senior Scale and Selection Grade as approved by the University as per Exts. P4 and P6 and extend the benefits on that basis. 5. In my view, the position is covered by the judgments of this Court in Cherian Mathew v. Principal S.B.College, Changanassery (1998(2) KLT 144) and Shalini Rachel v. Manager, Christian College (2007(3) KLT 355). In these judgments it has been held that University's decision is binding on the Deputy Director and that in case he WPC 23326/07 :3 : entertains any doubt, it is up to him to get it clarified by the University and act accordingly. In this case, Deputy Director has got the matter clarified by the University and the University has reiterated the correctness of the placement of the petitioner in Senior Scale and Selection Grade. In view of this, the Deputy Director is bound to accept the placement of the petitioner as confirmed by the University and process the claim. Therefore, I see no justification in Ext.P10 returning the service book of the petitioner and for that reason Ext.P10 will stand quashed. 6. The Deputy Director shall accept the petitioner's placement in the Senior Scale and Selection Grade and on that basis process the claim for benefits arising therefrom. It is directed that on submission of the bill and other records by the Principal, the same shall be processed and benefits released, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks thereafter. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp