High Court Kerala High Court

Prof. S. Sidharthan vs The Registrar on 11 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
Prof. S. Sidharthan vs The Registrar on 11 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 22544 of 2008(H)


1. PROF. S. SIDHARTHAN, AGED 61,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE REGISTRAR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR,

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,

4. THE MANAGER, SN COLLEGE,

5. THE PUNJAB UNIVERSITY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA UTY.

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

 Dated :11/08/2008

 O R D E R
                                       K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                  ............................................................................
                               W.P.(C) No. 22544 OF 2008
                  ............................................................................
                               Dated this the 11th August, 2008

                                         J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is an Ex-Service man., who retired from Indian Air Force as a

Corporal. It is stated in the Writ Petition that during his service in the Indian Air Force,

the petitioner has completed the Corporal course of Air Force, which is equivalent to

Pre-Degree course and that he had secured B.A. and M.A. degrees from Punjab

University . After his retirement in 1980, the petitioner had joined the service as a

Lecturer in Philosophy in the S.N. College under Sree Narayana Trust on 24.11.1982.

His appointment as Junior Lecturer was approved and his promotion as Lecturer in

1985 was also approved, it is stated. It is further stated that the petitioner passed

M.Phil course with First Class from the University of Madras during 1989-1990. Ext.P3

is the mark list issued by the Controller of Examinations of the University of Madras on

10.04.1991. The petitioner states that he completed the M.Phil course during the

period from 12.10.1989 to 10.10.1990 with the sanction of the Department of Higher

Education. The petitioner relies on Ext. P4 extract of the relevant page of his service

book in support of his contention. In 1993, it is stated that, the scale of pay of the

petitioner was fixed in the pay scale of the Lecturer, Senior Grade Scale by the Deputy

Director of Collegiate Education, as per Ext. P5 order dated 03.12.1993. Pursuant to

Ext. P5 order, the Principal, S.N.College, Cherthala fixed the pay scale of the petitioner

in the scale of pay of Lecturer, Senior Grade Scale. with effect from 01.11.1991. The

petitioner was promoted as Lecturer, Selection Grade in the year 2002 with effect

from 24.11.1997. The petitioner states that he would have been eligible for promotion

only with effect from 24.11.1998 as per his service and seniority, but for his acquiring

M.Phil degree in the meanwhile making him eligible to get one year’s weightage. It is

W.P.(C) No. 22544 OF 2008
2

averred that the first respondent refused to approve the weightage for promotion on

the basis of the petitioner’s acquiring M.Phil degree on the ground that the petitioner

had not submitted the scheme and syllabus of his previous qualification personally.

2. Though the petitioner contends that he was entitled to get the pay scale of

Lecturer, Selection Grade with effect from 24.11.1997 on his acquiring M.Phil degree

and gaining weightage of one year, he informed respondent Nos. 1 and 4 that he was

ready to relinquish his right of weightage for one year. Such a request was made in the

representation dated 24.03.2003. The Manager, as per Ext. P7 order dated

02.05.2003 revised the date of promotion of the petitioner as Lecturer, Selection

Grade with effect from 24.11.1998 by excluding the weightage. The petitioner retired

from service on 31.03.2003. on attaining the age of superannuation. It is stated that

in the Pension Payment order, the post held by the petitioner at the time of his

retirement is wrongly entered as ‘Principal’ instead of Lecturer, Selection Grade. Later,

the Accountant General clarified that the petitioner’s designation was Lecturer, Senior

Grade only, while according to the petitioner, his designation should have been

Lecturer, Selection Grade as per Ext. P7 order. The petitioner contends that though

the Management had promoted him as Lecturer, Selection Grade, the Accountant

General has wrongly mentioned the designation of the petitioner as Lecturer, Senior

Grade.

3. Pointing out his grievances, the petitioner had submitted Ext. P11

representation dated 11.09.2006 to the Registrar of the Kerala University. The

petitioner had also submitted Ext.P12 reminder to the Registrar of the Kerala University.

Exts. P11 and P12 are pending disposal.

4. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:

W.P.(C) No. 22544 OF 2008
3

“i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ

directing the 1st respondent to ratify the eligible promotion of the

petitioner to the post of Lecturer, Selection Grade, with effect

from 24.11.1998, without any further delay, in the interest of

justice.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ

directing the respondents to consider and take an action on

Exhibits P11 and P12 without any further delay by affording a

reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.

iii. Declare that the petitioner is eligible for promotion to the post

of Lecturer, Selection Grade, with effect from 24.11.1998.

iv. Pass such any other order, relief or direction as this Hon’ble

Court may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity ad good

conscience. ”

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner confines his relief to relief No.(ii) for the

time being. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent

to dispose of Exhibits P11 and P12 representations as expeditiously as possible and at

any rate within a period of two months, after affording an opportunity of being heard to

the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified

copy of the judgment before the first respondent. The first respondent shall also hear

the fourth respondent, Manager.

K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.

lk