IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 15514 of 2009(H)
1. SUDHAMONY.T.,MATRON,UNIVERSITY LADIES
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE VICE CHANCELLOR,
... Respondent
2. THE REGISTRAR,
3. SINDHU M.MENON,STOREKEEPER GRADE-III,
For Petitioner :SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA
For Respondent :SRI.K.S.MOHAMMED HASHIM,SC,CUSAT,COCHIN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :16/02/2010
O R D E R
S. Siri Jagan, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W.P(C) No. 15514 of 2009
&
W.P(C) No. 1842 of 2010
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this, the 16th day of February, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
In these two writ petitions, the petitioners are claimants for
allotment of quarters in the Cochin University of Science and
Technology. Both of them claim the same type of quarters, namely, a
E Type Quarter. Two such quarters are vacant. Earlier, by Ext. P9
order in W.P(C) No. 1842/2010, the University directed allotment of a
quarter to the petitioner in that writ petition as a special case. That
is challenged by the petitioner in the other writ petition. According to
the petitioner in W.P(C) No. 15514/2009, allotment of quarters can
only be in accordance with seniority as stipulated in the Rules for
allotment of quarters, which is produced as Ext. P8 in W.P(C) No.
1842/2010. According to the petitioner in W.P(C) No. 15514/2009,
the petitioner in the other writ petition is much junior and is not
therefore entitled for allotment of the quarters overlooking seniority.
2. The contention of the petitioner in W.P(C) No. 1842/2010 is
that she has invoked the powers of the Vice Chancellor under Rule 11
(iv) of Ext. P8 Rules, wherein the Vice Chancellor has the right to
allot quarters out of turn for any employee for any special reasons to
be recorded. The contention is that the petitioner’s son, namely,
Vinayak Suresh, who was born prematurely, was subjected to a brain
surgery immediately after his birth, as a result of which he is
suffering from hydrocephalus, for which he is under constant
treatment ever since his birth. Therefore, the petitioner’s son
requires special care and attention from the petitioner, which is
evident from Exts.P3 to P6 medical records/certificates. The
petitioner would contend that she can take proper care of her son if
she reside in the quarters along with her son.
W.P.C. Nos. 15514/09 & 1842/2010 -: 2 :-
3. The standing counsel for the University would now contend
that in view of the disputes between the parties, the Vice Chancellor
has reconsidered the matter as directed in W.P(C) No. 15514/2009
and has decided to allot quarters strictly in accordance with seniority.
4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.
5. It is true that Ext. P8 lays down the rules for allotment of
quarters in accordance with seniority. But, clause 11(iv) of Ext. P8
reads thus:
“(iv) The Vice-Chancellor shall, however have the right to
allot quarters out-of-turn to any employee for any special reasons
to be recorded.”
Such power has been conferred on the Vice Chancellor to be
exercised in appropriate cases. In fact, the Vice Chancellor had
exercised that power considering the special circumstances
mentioned by the petitioner, which resulted in Ext. P9 order. The
standing counsel for the University is not able to tell me the
circumstances which promoted the Vice Chancellor to take a
different stand now. I am of opinion that the circumstances narrated
by the petitioner in W.P(C) No. 1842/2010 are more than sufficient for
the Vice Chancellor to exercise the discretion vested in him as per
the Rules to allot quarters out of turn to the petitioner in W.P(C) No.
1842/2010. I do not find any reason for the Vice Chancellor to take a
different view than what has been communicated as per Ext. P9.
In the above circumstances, I hold that the petitioner in W.P(C)
No. 1842/2010, Smt. Sindhu M. Menon, is entitled to allotment of
one of the two vacant quarters as per Ext. P9. This shall be done
within one week from today. Regarding the other vacant quarters, it
would be open to the Vice Chancellor to take appropriate decision in
W.P.C. Nos. 15514/09 & 1842/2010 -: 3 :-
accordance with the Rules.
The writ petitions are disposed of as above.
Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.
Tds/