IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 24TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
DR. RAJEEV T. ULAHANNAN, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR,
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS, PAVANATMA COLLEGE,
MURIKKASSERY, IDUKKI, KERALA -685604.
BY ADVS.ABRAHAM VAKKANAL (SR.)
PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL
VINEETHA SUSAN THOMAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,
PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 560.
2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN- 695033.
4 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011, VIKAS BHAVAN.
5 THE MANAGER, PAVANATMA COLLEGE, MURIKKASSERY, IDUKKI,
KERALA -685604.
6 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS
REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P. O., KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 686 560.
SMT. PARVATHY .K-GP
SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022
-2-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who has been appointed as an Assistant Professor in the services of the 'Pavanatma College', Idukki - of which the 5th respondent is its Manager, impugns Ext.P13 order of the Mahatma Gandhi University ('University', for short), to which, the College is affiliated, declining approval to his appointment, saying that the College does not have enough workload to accommodate him.
2. The petitioner says that the reasoning in Ext.P13 goes contrary to Exts.P10 and P12 Government Orders; and that Ext.P18 order, subsequently issued by the University on 14.05.2021, would fortify this because they merely say that they are awaiting instructions from the Government, based on Ext.P17 letter, WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022 -3- which was issued to them in the year 2017.
3. The petitioner contends that the stand of the University is wholly and egregiously improper because, even going by the admitted scenario, the College obtains 57 hours of workload - as has been stated in Ext.P17 itself
- and therefore, that as per Exts.P10 and P12 Orders of the Government, the College is entitled to four posts, the last of which has been offered to him. The petitioner thus prays that Exts.P13 and P18 be quashed and the University be directed to approve his appointment, without any further delay.
4. The afore submissions of the petitioner, as made by his learned counsel - Sri.Paul Abraham Vakkanal, were answered by Sri.Surin George Ipe - learned Standing Counsel WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022 -4- for the University, arguing that his client has issued Ext.P13 because, going by Ext.P17 letter issued by the Government of Kerala to them, the fixing of workload of the College appears to be in error. He then submitted that, as per the declarations of the College, they have 77 hours in the Physics Department; while, Ext.P11 makes it evident that they have only 59 hours. He submitted that, in any event of the matter, neither of the afore figures are binding on the University and that it is for them to make a final decision as to the workload, and whether it would be sufficient to accommodate the fourth post.
5. The learned Government Pleader - Smt.Parvathy K., submitted that the Government has only brought to the notice of the University the imperative of following the WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022 -5- stipulations with respect to the workload and the number of posts which can be offered. She submitted that, therefore, they have no role to play at this stage and it is for the University to abide by the instructions given to them through Ext.P17.
6. In reply, Sri.Paul Abraham Vakkanal submitted that, even under Ext.P10 - which has been subsequently clarified by Ext.P12 order - the Government has made it limpid that a post of 'Assistant Professor' will be available for every 16 hours, or for the balance 9 hours and more. He submitted that even assuming that the facts stated in Ext.P17 can be accepted, the College has 57 hours in the Physics Department and therefore, that, mathematically, the balance 9 hours would attract one additional post of 'Assistant Professor'. He submitted WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022 -6- that, therefore, there is no controversy at all in this case, and that Ext.P13 has been issued without proper thought by the University.
7. When I consider the afore submissions, it is perspicuous that the real controversy between the parties is as to whether there are sufficient work hours in the College to allow the appointment of the petitioner in the fourth post in the Physics Department. This issue certainly is in the realm of facts and will have to be assessed and verified by the University appropriately, because it is not within the province of the Government to do so, even going by the applicable Statutes. Further, this Court has been stating repeatedly that the University cannot treat themselves as being subservient to the Government and has to act autonomously, as they are expected under the WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022 -7- Statutory Scheme.
Resultantly, I order this writ petition and set aside Ext.P13; however, with a consequential direction to the competent Authority of the 6th respondent - University, to immediately assess the workload of the 'Pavanatma College', Idukki, and then decide whether the fourth post in the Physics Department is allowable to them. This shall be done, adverting to Exts.P10 and P12 Government Orders; leading to necessary proceedings being issued in this matter, after hearing the Principal of the College, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
On the afore exercise being completed and if it is found that the fourth post is WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022 -8- allowable, then certainly, necessary orders approving the appointment of the petitioner, subject to all other conditions being satisfied, shall be issued within a period of one month thereafter.
Needless to say, in such event, all eligible benefits shall be disbursed to the petitioner, without any avoidable delay.
At this time, Sri.Surin George Ipe intervened to request that this Court to clarify that the merits of the claim of the petitioner has not been decided by this Court affirmatively. Certainly, this Court has not done so and I so clarify.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE akv WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022 -9- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17927/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O NO.260/2010/H. EDN WITH ANNEXURE ISSUED BY HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT DATED 20-08-2010.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 02-11-
2018 PUBLISHED IN MATRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 07-112018.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO: D2/463/2016/HEDN DATED 17-10-2018 ISSUED BY HIGHER EDN. DEPT APPOINTING THE GOVT. REPRESENTATIVE TO THE SELECTION COMMITTEE.
EXHIBIT P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 14-01-2019 GIVEN BY COLLEGE TO THE UNIVERSITY EXHIBIT P3(B) TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF EXPERTS PANEL DATED 02-02-2019 GIVEN TO COLLEGE BY UNIVERSITY EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SELECTION COMMITTEE / RANK LIST DATED 05-03-2019 ISSUED BY CORPORATION EDUCATIONAL AGENCY. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 03-06-2019.
EXHIBIT P5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 06-06-2019.
EXHIBIT P5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE PRINCIPAL-
IN-CHARGE BY WHICH THE JOINING REPORT AND APPOINTMENT ORDER WAS FORWARDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE UNIVERSITY DATED 27-06-2019 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BY R4 FIXING THE WORKLOAD AS 57 HOURS IN PHYSICS DEPT. DATED 27.08-2016.
WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022 -10- EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FROM R3 TO R2 SEEKING CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE 4TH POST DATED 04-112016.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR INFORMATION OF RTI ACT DATED 10-05-2017. EXHIBIT P8(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FROM PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER DATED 07-06-2017. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER DATED 18-
092017GRANTING APPROVAL TO THE APPOINTMENT OF SHRI. MATHEW K. VARGHESE MADE IN 2013 W.E.F 03.06-2014.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O NO.93/18/H. EDN DATED 09-05-2018.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE WORKLOAD STATEMENTS AS PER THE RUNNING SYLLABUS APPROVED BY THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY. EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) NO. 313/20/H.EDN DATED 11-09-2020 MAKING IT CLEAR THAT G.O (MS) NO. 155/20/H.EDN DATED 01-04-2020, WILL HAVE EFFECT FROM 01-06-2020 ONLY. EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO.
118/131/2/ ACADEMIC/20 DATED 25-11-2020 DENYING THE APPROVAL OF PETITIONER'S APPOINTMENT.
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION, FILED AGAINST EXT. P-13 ORDER, DATED 09-12-2020. EXHIBIT P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE IA 3/2020 DATED 10-12-
2020 TO WITHDRAW W.P(C) 14975/2020, WITH LIBERTY TO FILE A FRESH ONE.
EXHIBIT P15(A) A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 21-12-2020 IN WP(C) NO. 14975 OF 2020.
EXHIBIT P16 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 28112 OF 2020 DATED 16-12-2020.
WP(C) NO. 17927 OF 2022 -11- EXHIBIT P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVT. LETTER DATED 27-4-
2017, GIVEN TO THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P18 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14-5-2021 BY THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P19 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. F3/49/2021 DATED 18-2.2021 EXHIBIT P20 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22-1-2021 TO HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT. EXHIBIT P20(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 15-2-2021 FROM HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT. EXHIBIT P20(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 15-3-2021 FROM R3.
EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPIES OF THE RTI QUESTIONS DATED 19-
3.2021.
EXHIBIT P21(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 29-3-2021. EXHIBIT P22 TRUE COPY OF THE RTI QUESTIONS DATED 19-3-
2021 TO R3.
EXHIBIT P22(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 28-4-2021. EXHIBIT P23 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SENT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 28-6-2021.
EXHIBIT P24 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19-03-2015 IN W.P(C) NO. 2437/2015.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE