High Court Kerala High Court

P.K.Kunhammu vs The Headmistress on 20 October, 2010

Kerala High Court
P.K.Kunhammu vs The Headmistress on 20 October, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 945 of 2009(K)


1. P.K.KUNHAMMU, ARABIC TEACHER
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE HEADMISTRESS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

3. THE MANAGER

4. STATE OF KERALA

                For Petitioner  :DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM

                For Respondent  :SRI.N.RAGHURAJ

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :20/10/2010

 O R D E R
                 K.T.SANKARAN, J.
          ------------------------------
              W.P.(C).No.945 OF 2009
          ------------------------------
      Dated this the 20th day of October, 2010




                     JUDGMENT

The petitioner while working as Arabic teacher

in Aided Senior Basic School, Mannalur, Palakkad

District, availed leave without allowance. Rule 60

(c) of Part I KSR was amended by which it was

provided that if the date of superannuation happens

to be during the leave period, the teacher is not

entitled to continue beyond the date of

superannuation unless he joins duty on the

succeeding date of the date of superannuation. As

a teacher, the petitioner could otherwise continue

to work up to 31.3.2007.

2. The petitioner availed commuted leave with

effect from 14.8.2006 to 17.11.2006. Going by his

date of birth, the date of superannuation was

14.8.2006. The petitioner contended that the

amendment of Rule 60(c) of Part I KSR could not

W.P.(C).No.945 OF 2009 2

operate retrospectively taking away the vested

right of the teachers. The petitioner filed WP(C)

No.5218 of 2007 in which as per the interim order,

the petitioner was permitted to continue to work.

WP(C)No.5218 of 2007 was disposed of as per Ext.P7

judgment dated 19.2.2007 directing the Assistant

Educational Officer to take an appropriate

decision. The petitioner was also permitted to

attend duty as a teacher in the school. The

Assistant Educational Officer passed Ext.P8 order

dated 27.3.2007 holding that the petitioner should

be treated as retired with effect from the date of

superannuation. The matter was taken up before the

Government. The Government passed Ext.P10 order

dated 16.6.2008. The operative portion of Ext.P10

reads as follows:

“The case has been examined in detail
with reference to the report of the Assistant
Educational Officer, Kuzhalmannam and the
relevant orders in force.

Rule 60(c) Part I KSRs deals with
Compulsory Retirement of teaching staff of
all educational institutions. By virtue of
Rule 4 to Chapter XXVII B KER, the above Rule
in KSR is made applicable to teachers of
aided schools also. Rule 60(c) Part I KSR has
been amended by G.O(P) No.331/2006/Fin. dated
10.8.06 to the effect that if the teaching
staff who are on leave on the day they attain

W.P.(C).No.945 OF 2009 3

the age of 55 years fail to join duty on the
first working day immediately after the date
of superannuation, they shall be retired with
effect from the date of superannuation
itself. Subsequently the Government
clarified that as the amendment takes effect
only from 10.8.06 and those who were
sanctioned or availed of leave prior to
1.8.06 will be permitted to rejoin duty on
expiry of the leave even if the leave extends
beyond their date of superannuation. Later
the above position was further clarified vide
Circular No.30/2007 Fin dated 17.4.07 to the
effect that the restriction that leave cannot
be sanctioned for the extended period of
service will take effect only from 1.4.07 ie,
after 1.4.07 such leave will not be
sanctioned and that leave already sanctioned
prior to 31.3.2007 need not be cancelled. In
view of the above, the petitioner is entitled
to continue in service till 31.3.07 by virtue
of the clarification issued by the Government
in circular No.30/2007/Fin. dated 17.4.07.
Government are therefore pleased to allow the
Ext.P9 revision petition and order
accordingly.

The Assistant Educational Officer,
Kuzhalmannam will take urgent further steps
in the matter.”

3. Thereafter, the Assistant Educational

Officer passed Ext.P13 order dated 27th November,

2008. In Ext.P13, the contention put forward by the

petitioner was not accepted. The petitioner filed

Ext.P16 revision before the Government. It is

stated that Ext.P16 revision is pending disposal.

Though the main relief prayed for in the Writ

Petition is to issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash

W.P.(C).No.945 OF 2009 4

Ext.P13 order, since the petitioner has thereafter

filed Ext.P16 revision before the Government, the

learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

it would be sufficient, if a direction is issued to

the Government to dispose of Ext.P16 revision

expeditiously.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the

Writ Petition is disposed of directing the

Government (4th respondent) to consider and dispose

of Ext.P16 revision filed by the petitioner as

expeditiously as possible, and at any rate within a

period of three months from the date of receipt of

a copy of the judgment, after affording an

opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and

the Manager. The petitioner shall produce a copy of

the Writ Petition, a copy of I.A.No.14201 of 2010

and certified copy of the judgment before the 4th

respondent.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE.

cms