IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17311 of 2008(J)
1. DR.K.K. JOSE, KARIPOPAKUDIYIL,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MAHATHMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,
... Respondent
2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR,
For Petitioner :SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL
For Respondent :SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :24/09/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J
-----------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.17311/2008
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of September, 2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioner was working as a Selection Grade Lecturer in
St. Thomas college, Pala. While working so, he got himself
selected as the Director of Student Service of the first
respondent University and by Ext.P1 order he was
appointed. According to the petitioner, subsequently on
receipt of Ext.P2, he realized that the University does not
consider the post as a teaching post and therefore he sought
to be relieved from the service of the University.
Subsequently, by Ext.P5, he was ordered to be relieved, and
it was ordered that his lien will be retained for two years.
Thereafter the University issued Ext.P6, a revised order,
which did not provide for retention of lien unlike as
ordered in Ext.P4. It is challenging Ext.P6 to the extend that
WP(c).No.17311/08 2
lien is not retained this writ petition has been filed.
2. The University would submit that in terms of rule 16
of Part I Chapter III KSR once the petitioner has chosen to
join duty as Selection Grade Lecturer in St. Thomas College
he could not have retained lien in the University service.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner raised two
contentions. One is that, Ext.P6 is in violation of the
principles of natural justice, in as much as the same has
been issued without notice to the petitioner. The other
contention is that, under Rule 16 of Chapter III Part-I KSR,
he is entitled to retain lien in the University service.
4. Rule 16 of Chapter III Part-I KSR provides that;
“Unless in any case it be otherwise provided in
these rules, an officer on substantive
appointment to any permanent post acquires a
lien on that post and ceases to hold any lien;
previously acquired on any other post.”
5. Therefore if the petitioner is to have lien in the
University service, even after joining St. Thomas College,
Pala, it should be so provided in the KSR itself.
6. In this case, on the petitioner’s appointment and
declaration of successful completion of probation, he had
WP(c).No.17311/08 3
acquired lien in the University service. But however, once
the petitioner got himself relieved from the University and
joined as Selection Grade Lecturer in the St.Thomas
college, Palai, he will loose his lien in the University
service, unless the same is safeguarded by an express
provision in the KSR itself. Apart from the clause in Ext.P4
order referred to above, petitioner has no case that any of
the provisions in KSR provides for retention of his lien. If
that be so, petitoner cannot contend that he is entitled to
have his lien retained in the University service. Therefore, I
am not satisfied that by Ext.P6 the petitioner has been
deprived of any of his legal rights.
7.By reason of Ext.P6, in the absence of any prejudice
having been caused to the petitioner, I do not also find any
merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the
petitioner that there is violation of the principles of natural
justice as well.
Writ Petition fails and is dismissed.
ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
vi
WP(c).No.17311/08 4
