Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala vs State Of Kerala on 18 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 29TH MAGHA,1942
WA.No.1807 OF 2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.03.2017 IN WPC 467/2017 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE WP(C):
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT,GENERAL EDUCATION (K)
DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
2 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
MELADY EDUCATION SUB DISTRICTP.O MELADY, KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT 673 522
3 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
GP RAJI T BHASKAR(APPELLANTS)
RESPONDENTS/PETITONERS & RESPONDENTS NO. 3 TO 5 IN WPC:
1 N. SATHIAN
TEACHEER IRINGOTH U.P SCHOOL,MELADY SUB
DISTRICTRESIDING AT NELLIKANDAVIDE, CHERUVANNOOR
P.O(VIA)P.O MEPAYOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 524
2 V.M PRADEEPAN
TEACHER, VILAYATTUR ELAMPILAD M.U.P SCHOOL,RESIDING
AT VEKILATHUMEETHAL, P.O CHERUVANNOOR,9VIA) P.O
MEPAYUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 524
3 R. VINOD KUMAR
TEACHER, MUYIPOTH M.U.P SCHOOL,RESIDING AT
VEKILATHUMEETHAL, P.O CHERUVANNOOR,(VIA) P.O MEPAYUR,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 524
4 THE MANAGER,
IRINGOTH U.P.SCHOOL, P.O.MELADY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-
673522.
W.A.No.1807/2017 2
5 THE MANAGER
VILALYATTUR ELAMPILAD M.U.P.SCHOOL, CHERUVANNOOR,
(VIA) P.O.MEPAYUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673524.
6 THE MANAGER
MUYIPOTH M.U.P.SCHOOL, P.O.MUYIPOTH, KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT-673 524.
R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
R1-3 BY ADV. SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA
R4 BY ADV. SRI.T.S.NEJIMUDDIN
R5 BY ADV. SMT.T.V.NEEMA
R6 BY ADV. SRI.H.PRAVEEN (KOTTARAKARA)
OTHER PRESENT:
GP RAJI T BHASKAR(APPELLANT)
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-10-2019, THE
COURT ON 18-02-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.1807/2017 3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 18th day of February 2021
A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J
The State of Kerala as well as the Educational Officer,
Melady Education Sub District and the Director of Public
Instructions, Thiruvananthapuram are the appellants before
us impugning the judgment dated 29.3.2017 in W.P.
(C)No.467/2015. By the impugned judgment, the learned
Single Judge, by considering the claim of the writ petitioners,
who were appointed as Drawing Teachers in the Academic
Year 1992-1993, to the benefits conferred by Ext.P8 order
dated 23.3.2001 while approving their appointment as
Drawing Teachers in the school concerned, found that the
Government was not justified in confining the said benefits
prospectively with effect from 16.7.2001, but that the benefits
had to be extended to the writ petitioners with effect from the
respective dates of their initial appointment in the school.
While arriving at the said finding, the learned Single Judge
took note of Ext.P17 judgment as also Ext.P21 Government
Order granting benefits to other specialist teachers working in
other schools and was, therefore, of the view that the denial of
the same benefits to the writ petitioners in the writ petition
could not be justified. Consequently, a direction was given to
the 2nd respondent Assistant Educational Officer to grant the
benefits in Ext.P8 Government Order to the writ petitioners by
approving their appointment with effect from the dates of
their initial appointments, and to disburse to them all the
attendant monetary benefits within the period stipulated in
the judgment.
2. When the writ appeal came up for hearing, the
learned counsel for the respondents brought to our notice the
judgment dated 13.1.2012 of a Division Bench of this Court in
Writ Appeal No.275/2010, pursuant to which Ext.P21 order
had been passed by the Government. The Writ Appeal
judgment had clearly indicated that there was no justification
for the grant of benefits only prospectively and that the
benefits ought to have been granted retrospectively from the
date of initial appointment. Taking note of the said
developments and finding the judgment of the learned Single
Judge to be in accordance with the directions of this Court in
the Writ Appeal mentioned above, we see no reason to
interfere with the findings of the learned Single Judge
impugned before us in this Writ Appeal.
The Writ Appeal, therefore, fails and is accordingly
dismissed. The appellants shall endeavour to disburse the
monetary benefits due to the writ petitioners within two
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
Acd
