The Secretary To Government vs Amod Mathew

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 7719 Ker
Judgement Date : 28 June, 2022

Kerala High Court
The Secretary To Government vs Amod Mathew on 28 June, 2022
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
                                     &
                THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
         TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944
                         WA NO. 656 OF 2022
     AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DTD. 2.12.2021 IN WP(C) 21689/2021 OF
                        HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WPC:

     1      THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
            GENERAL EDUCATION (T) DEPARTMENT
            GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
     2      THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION(HIGHER SECONDARY)
            HOUSING BOARD BUILDING
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695011
     3      THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
            EDUCATION, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686575
            BY ADV.SMT.V.VINITA, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS IN WPC:

     1      AMOD MATHEW
            S/O. MATHEW,
            TEACHER (HSS TEACHER)
            ST.PAUL'S HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
            VALIYAKUMARAMANGALAM
            MOONILAVU P.O
            KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686586
     2      THE MANAGER
            CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY,
            DIOCESE OF PALAI
            PALA P.O
            KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686575
            BY ADVS.SHAJI THOMAS
            JEN JAISON


     THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 28.06.2022,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                           2
Writ Appeal No.656 of 2022


                P.B.SURESH KUMAR & C.S.SUDHA, JJ.
                  --------------------------------------------------
                          Writ Appeal No.656 of 2022
                      -------------------------------------------
                    Dated this the 28th day of June, 2022


                                JUDGMENT

C.S.Sudha, J.

In this intra-court appeal, the appellants who are respondents 1 to 3 in the writ petition challenge the grant of the benefit of the third proviso to Rule 33(b)(2) of Part I of Kerala Service Rules (KSR) by the impugned judgment in W.P.(C)No.21689/2021. The respondents herein are the petitioner and the fourth respondent respectively in the writ petition. The parties and the documents in this writ appeal will be referred to as described in the writ petition.

2. Heard Smt.V.Vinita, the learned Senior Government Pleader for the appellants and Sri.Shaji Thomas, the learned counsel for the respondents.

3. The third proviso to Rule 33(b)(2) says that when leave without allowances are taken by the teachers for completion of training courses such as B.Ed., Hindi Teachers' Training, Language Teachers' Training and Teachers' 3 Writ Appeal No.656 of 2022 Training Certificate Course, it shall count for increment. This proviso was deleted w.e.f. 11/05/2005 by G.O.(P)No.217/2005/Fin. published as S.R.O.No.526/2005. In Deepika vs. State of Kerala, 2007(1) KLT 71, it has been held that the deletion of the 3rd Proviso will have only prospective effect.

4. Admittedly, the petitioner in the writ petition had applied for LWA which was sanctioned before the Proviso was deleted. The representation given by the petitioner along with two others to the Government, claiming the benefit was rejected by Ext.P9 order. This was challenged by one of the parties in Ext.P9 order. This Court by Ext.P10 judgment, found the rejection to be unsustainable and directed the respondent State to treat the period of leave availed for acquiring B.Ed. qualification as service for all purposes including grant of increments and consequential benefits were directed to be calculated and disbursed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of Ext.P10 judgment.

5. The fact that the petitioner herein is similarly placed as the petitioner in Ext.P10 judgment, is not disputed. For what earthly purpose/reason this appeal has been filed by the respondent State is not clear. Apparently, for some extraneous consideration. This is all the more so, 4 Writ Appeal No.656 of 2022 because Ext.P10 judgment has not been challenged by the respondents till date. However, they seem to be quite particular that the petitioner should not be granted the benefit which have been granted to candidates similarly placed. One another ground pointed out is the delay in the petitioner moving this Court. However, that is no ground to reject the claim of the petitioner especially in the light of the decisions in Deepika (Supra), Exts.P6 and P10 judgments.

We find no merit in the appeal and hence the same is dismissed.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE Sd/-

C.S.SUDHA JUDGE ami/