IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2008 / 30TH SRAVANA 1930 WA.No. 822 of 2007 --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN O.P. NO. 5832/2002. .................... APPELLANTS/ RESPONDENTS 1 & 2: ----------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION (J) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVACIS. RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 3 & 4: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. A.R.SREEKUMAR, ASSISTANT LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, NSS POLYTECHNIC, PANDALAM. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, NSS POLYTECHNIC GOVERNING BODY, NSS COLLEGE'S CENTRAL COMMITTEE, NSS HEAD OFFICE, PERUNNA, CHANGANACHERRY. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, N.S.S POLYTECHNIC, MANNAM NAGAR PO, PANDALAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER (SR.). ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN, ADV. SRI.P.GOPAL. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/08/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A.No.822 OF 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated 21st August, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . The writ petitioner entered the service as a Trade Instructor from 1.6.1988 and was promoted as Demonstrator in November, 1996. By Ext.P4 dated 31.7.1999 he was promoted as Assistant Lecturer with effect from 2.8.1999. Consequent to the promotion of the petitioner as Assistant Lecturer, new service rules came into effect from 1.6.2000 (Annexure II). Thereafter, there was no post of Assistant Lecturer, but, with regard to the existing posts, it was stated that they have to be abolished in a phased manner. New rules were framed in tune with the AICTE staff pattern. The Government, by Ext.P13 order dated 21.12.1998, has implemented the new staff pattern which is as follows: “The proposed staff pattern is in tune with the AICTE approved staff structure where there are no posts of Assistant Lecturers in Polytechnics. As a result when the standard staff pattern is introduced, 209 posts of Assistant Lecturers will have to be abolished and 175 posts of Lecturers and 8 posts of Head of Section will have to be created. Since many of the Assistant Lecturers are qualified for promotion as Lecturers instead of W.A.822/2007 2 creating 175 posts of Lecturers the post of Assistant Lecturers can be upgraded as Lecturers and qualified Assistant Lecturers can be promoted and posted in the upgraded posts. The remaining posts of Assistant Lecturers can be abolished in a phased manner as and when the incumbent vacates the posts by promotion, retirement or any other reason.” Accordingly, the petitioner who was appointed before the new rules came into force can continue as Assistant Lecturer till he is further promoted or retired from service. But, since the petitioner whose service as Assistant Lecturer was not approved, has approached this court. The reason for non-approval of the same was introduction of new rules abolishing the post of Assistant Lecturer and it is contended by the Government that there is no post of Assistant Lecturer as contended by the petitioner especially after the introduction of the new rules. Learned single Judge found that by Ext.P12 order another person was granted the similar benefit and the same benefit should be granted to the petitioner also. Ext.P12 Government Order reads as follows: “As per G.O.(MS)76/2000/H.Edn. Dated 31/5/2000 the posts of Assistant Lecturers were abolished subject to creation of corresponding posts of Lecturers simultaneously. As such, post held by Sri.S.Srikanth could be abolished only in a phased manner either when the person retires from service or on the date on which the person W.A.822/2007 3 holding the post acquires B.Tech qualification. Based on the facts of the case, there appears to be no reason to deny approval of the promotion of Sri.Sreekanth to the post of Assistant Lecturer with effect from 2/8/1999, since the post was ordered to be abolished in the G.O.(P)76/2000 dated 31/5/2000, not with effect from the date of the Government Order but automatically as and when the incumbent vacates the post either on retirement or on promotion to the post of Lecturer. In the circumstances I am directed to inform you that the order of approval of the appointment of Sri.S.Sreekanth to the post of Assistant Lecturer be conveyed with effect from 2/8/1999 as the incumbent was holding at the post of Assistant Lecturer on that date and till he was promoted to the higher post on 28/5/2003.” Learned Government Pleader submitted that there is no objection for giving similar benefits, as given in Ext.P12, to the petitioner also, but, it was submitted that in that case only notional appointment was given and no salary was paid as can be seen from Annexures II and III. In that case, Sri.Sreekanth was getting salary as Assistant Lecturer till he was promoted and thereafter he was working in the promoted post and there was no salary loss. But, if the appellant's contention is accepted, he will not be entitled to any salary at all. If he can continue as Assistant Lecturer till his retirement, he is entitled to salary also. He was also working in that post. But, we make it clear that it is decided on the facts of this case alone as the petitioner W.A.822/2007 4 himself was promoted before the new rules came into force and post of Assistant Lecturer is abolished in a phased manner. No new incumbent can be promoted after new rules came into existence. The appeal is dismissed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE tks