IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 29454 of 2007(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MANJULA C., AGED 40 YEARS, D/O.LATE T.C.BALAN, LECTURER IN BOTANY, NEHRU ARTS & SCIENCE COLLEGE, KANHANGAD. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SMT.R.LEELA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGE EDUCATION, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, CALICUT UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE KANNUR UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MANGATTUPARAMBU, KANNUR. 4. THE NEHRU ARTS AND SCIENCE COLLEGE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, KANHANGAD P.O. PADNEKAD, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ SRI. P.C. SASIDHARAN – SC SRI. M. SASEENDRAN – SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 29454 of 2007 EXT.P1: COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT LETTER DATED 14.1.2005 IS ISSUED BY R4. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE G.O.NO.39/2001 DTD 27/3/2001. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF R4 DTD 3/1/2005. EXT.P4: COPY OF R3'S ORDER DTD 23.1.2007. EXT.P5: COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY R1 TO R4 DTD 1/11/2006. EXT.P6; COPY OF THE INTIMATION DTD 17.4.07 ISSUED BY R4. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE SALARY BILL SUBMITTED BY R4 FOR THE PETITIONER AND OTHERS. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD 23/9/2004 IN WP(C) 22042/04 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE WORK LOAD DTD 10.4.2007 ISSUED BY R4. 2ND RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS EXT.R2(a): LR. NO.C2/3007/2005/DT. 8/10/07 FROM DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE TO REGISTRAR UNIVERSITY OF KANNUR. EXT.R2(b): COPY OF LR. NO.ACAD B2/1246/05 DT. 10/10/2007 FROM THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF KANNUR TO DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE. EXT.R2(c): COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.78/2001/H.EDN. DTD 11.07.2001. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.29454 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 21ST day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Botany on 14.1.2005 by the 4th respondent. The appointment was duly approved by the University also. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that in spite of approval of appointment by the University, the salary due to the petitioner has not been disbursed yet. The petitioner submits that in accordance with the decisions of this Court, once the University grants approval, the Government is bound to disburse the salary due to the approved teacher. 2. The Government has filed three counter affidavits in this case. In the first counter affidavit dated 18.10.2007, it is stated thus: “At the time of her appointment, there were two teachers working in the Botany department against the workload of 13 hours. As per the adalath of the Director of Collegiate Education, Thiruvananthapuram, the workload assessed in Botany Department was 13 hours and the eligible teaching post is one. In the proceedings order of the Director of Collegiate W.P.(c) No.29454/07 2 Education, it was mentioned that 2 teachers are in excess (out of 3 teachers who were working there in the department) in the department of Botany. But the workload assessed by the Principal in Botany department is 60 hours. It includes the workload of conditional courses of B.Sc. Plant Science (GO(MS) 39/01/H.Edn. Dated 27/3/2001). This conditional courses approved by Government, subject to the condition that there will be no additional financial commitment on the part of the Government on this account. In this circumstances, the above conditional course is to be excluded from the workload assessment.” The second counter affidavit is dated 17.12.2007, in paragraph 3 of which the rigour of the earlier counter affidavit was lightly modified as follows: “It is submitted that Smt. Manjula C was appointed as Lecturer in Botany in Nehru Arts & Science College, Kanhangad during 2005 considering the workload of conditionally sanctioned course B.SC Plant Science. This course was sanctioned by Government during 2001-02 as per G.O.(MS) No.39/01/H.Edn dated 27.03.2001 on condition specified in G.O.(MS) No.78/2001/H.Edn dated 11.7.01 that there will be no financial commitment on the part of the Government till the courses are stabilized i.e. The first batch is presented for the final year University examination. The newly sanctioned courses will be run with the existing staff/staff rendered surplus consequent on the delinking of pre-degree, no creation of teaching posts or W.P.(c) No.29454/07 3 engagement of guest lecturers is involved and that the courses which cannot be run without financial commitment will be cancelled.” Along with the counter affidavit dated 17.1.2008, they have produced Ext.R2(c) Government order, by which the earlier Government order on the subject was amended, in which the Government directed thus: “(i) the courses are sanctioned subject to the condition that there will be no financial commitment on the part of the Govt.till the Courses are stabilised (i.e. The first batch is presented for the final year University examinations), that the Universities will ensure that the newly sanctioned courses will be run solely with the existing staff/staff rendered surplus due to the delinking of Pre-degree courses and that no creation of new teaching of non-teaching post or engagement of guest lecturers will be involved. The contention of the Government is that in view of the above position, salary cannot be disbursed to the petitioner. 2. Apparently the contention of the Government is that the workload of the Botany Department of the 4th respondent College was fixed taking into account the courses sanctioned without financial commitment and if those courses are excluded there won't be sufficient workload to accommodate the petitioner in addition to the existing teachers. Now it is not W.P.(c) No.29454/07 4 disputed before me that the matter is governed by Ext.R2(c), the relevant portion of which has been extracted above. That order specifically states that the courses are sanctioned subject to the condition that there would be no financial commitment on the part of the Government till the courses are stabilized i.e. the first batch is presented for the final year University examinations. Therefore if that condition has been satisfied as on the date of appointment of the petitioner, then the Government cannot have any objection in disbursing the salary due to the petitioner. Therefore I directed the University to file a statement as to whether the above condition in Ext.R2(c) Government order has been satisfied. A statement has been filed by the standing counsel for the University, in which, in paragraph 2, it is stated thus: “It is submitted that the college has complied with the condition No.1 in G.O.(MS) NO.78/2001/H.Edn. Dated 11-7-2001 by presenting the first batch for the final year university examinations in the year 2004. Accordingly the condition No.1 in the aforesaid government order stands complied with. The statement is filed in compliance of the directions passed by this Hon'ble Court on 28.1.2008.” Accordingly, it is clear that the condition in Ext.R2(c) was W.P.(c) No.29454/07 5 satisfied in the year 2004. The appointment of the petitioner was on 14.1.2005. That being so, the Government cannot now raise any objection in disbursing the salary to the petitioner based on Ext.R2(c). In the above circumstances this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to see that the salary due to the petitioner is disbursed promptly every month from March onwards. Arrears of salary for the period from 14.1.2005 up to January 2008 shall be paid within two months. To enable the 2nd respondent to take steps in the matter, the Principal of the College shall forward the salary bills of the petitioner, afresh. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c) No.29454/07 6