IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 1395 of 2010()
1. K.MURALEEDHARAN,LECTURER IN ENGLISH
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF VOCATIONAL HIGHER
For Petitioner :SRI.S.RAMESH BABU
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
Dated :03/01/2011
O R D E R
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
----------------------------------
W.A.No.1395 of 2010
---------------------------------
Dated, this the 3rd day of January, 2011
J U D G M E N T
Ramachandran Nair, J.
This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned
Single Judge rejecting appellant’s claim for salary as a Full Time
Lecturer from 1995 onwards.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. Appellant was appointed as a Lecturer on contract basis
on a consolidated pay of Rs.1,000/- per month in an aided school,
which is not a party in the Writ Petition or in the Writ Appeal. Vide
Ext.P3 order, the Government granted pay scale of Rs.2,000-
3,200/- per month to permanent teachers who were engaged for 12
to 20 hours in the week in a School. The School, admittedly had
only 24 hours teaching in the subject “English”, and since there was
already one teacher on full time basis, appellant’s appointment itself
was unnecessary. However the appellant was given wages under
contract employment by the Management. The appellant’s claim for
being treated as a regular teacher from 1995 to 2001 was turned
down for the reason that the teacher senior to the appellant could
W.A.No.1395/2010
-2-
have been engaged for taking classes for 24 hours, which was
permissible under the Rules. However later, on account of
commencement of new courses, the working hours went up to 36
hours providing vacancies of two full time lecturers, of which one
was granted to the appellant. The appellant, in fact, got the scale of
pay of full time lecturers from 01/06/2001 onwards, and the same
is clarified by the learned Single Judge in the order in
R.P.No.521/2002. The Writ Appeal is filed for a direction to the
respondents to grant scale of pay to the appellant treating him as a
Full Time Lecturer from 1995 to June 2001. We are unable to accept
this contention because considering the fact that the working hours
of an English teacher in the School was only 24 hours and after
engaging a permanent teacher for 20 hours the balance working
hours left for the appellant was only 4 hours. Consequently the
appellant’s claim was rightly declined by the learned Single Judge.
We do not find any merit in the Writ Appeal and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)
(M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE)
jg