Dr.Jolly K.James vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 2538 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

      FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 2ND MAGHA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.27962 OF 2019(U)


PETITIONER:

               DR.JOLLY K.JAMES
               AGED 43 YEARS
               W/O SHAJI THOMAS,PARAMTHOTTIL HOUSE,
               CHOVOOR.P.O,ERATTUPETTA(VIA),NARIMATTAM,
               KOTTAYAM-686586.

               BY ADVS.
               SMT.SINDHU SANTHALINGAM
               SRI.A.D.SHAJAN

RESPONDENTS:

      1        STATE OF KERALA,
               SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
               HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
               SECRETARIATE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

      2        THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
               HIGHER EDUCATION(D)DEPARTMENT,
               COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

      3        THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
               HIGHER EDUCATION(D)DEPARTMENT,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

      4        THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
               NEAR FIRE STATION,VAYASKARAKUNNU,
               PALACE ROAD,KOTTAYAM-686001.

      5        THE MANAGER ,
               ST.BERCHMANS COLLEGE,CHANGANASSERY,
               KOTTAYAM-686101.

               R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER


               SR GP SMT. NISHA BOSE

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.27962 OF 2019(U)

                                          2




                                     JUDGMENT

Dated this the 22nd day of January 2021

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:

"a) Call for the records connected with the case;

b) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate order or direction, directing the respondents 2 to 5 to consider the application for the upper age limit of the petitioner for teaching MSW course in the 5th respondent college.

c) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to get similar relief granted in Ext.P3 upper age limit relaxation order.

d) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to continue teaching even after the crossing of upper age limit factor in teaching MSW course in the 5 th respondent college;

e) Declare that the delay and laches in consideration of Ext.P6 representation by respondents 2 to 5 are illegal and arbitrary;

f) Direct the respondents 2 to 5 to engage the petitioner as a teaching of 5 th respondent college on temporary basis till the consideration of Ext.P6 representation."

WP(C).No.27962 OF 2019(U)

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the petitioner has been appointed as Guest

Lecturer and has been teaching classes in the MSW course

which was sanctioned in the year 2014-15. It is submitted that

the posts have now been sanctioned by Ext.P11 order dated

30.12.2020. It is submitted that the petitioner, who was well

within the upper age limit for appointment, when she was

initially appointed as Guest Lecturer against the post, has now

crossed the upper age limit and is rendered ineligible for

appointment against the regular post. It is submitted that on

an earlier occasion, when there was a ban of appointments on

account of the pre-degree de-linking, the Government had

passed Ext.P3 order relaxing the upper age limit for

appointments. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P6

representation before respondents 2 to 4 seeking the

relaxation of the upper age limit to make her eligible for WP(C).No.27962 OF 2019(U)

consideration for appointment against the regular post now

sanctioned by Ext.P11. It is submitted that the representation

is liable to be considered.

4. A counter affidavit has been placed on record by the

4th respondent. It is submitted that the petitioner had been

working as Guest Lecturer in the 5th respondent's College. It is

submitted that the exemptions cannot be granted to persons

who are appointed as Guest Lecturer in BSW or MSW courses

since Ext.P3 does not apply to such courses.

5. Having considered the contentions advanced, I find

that the request in Ext.P6 is for the relaxation of the upper age

limit to make the petitioner eligible for appointment in

regular vacancies which have arisen due to the sanctioning of

posts on account of Ext.P11. It is submitted by the learned

counsel for the petitioner that the 5 th respondents College has

been sanctioned with the MSW course and that the request

made by the petitioner is therefore liable to be considered.

In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction

to respondents 2 to 4 to take up, consider and pass orders on

Ext.P6 representation preferred by the petitioner with notice WP(C).No.27962 OF 2019(U)

to the petitioner as well as the Manager within a period of two

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SVP WP(C).No.27962 OF 2019(U)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.18/11/2014 SENT BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD 18/8/2014 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2A A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD.1/6/2015 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2B A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD.3/1/2017 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.14/2/2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.30/5/2015 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,DEPUTY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.8/3/2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.27/9/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 5

EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P8: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18/05/2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P9: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 26/09/2019 SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.

WP(C).No.27962 OF 2019(U)

EXHIBIT P10: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 07/11/2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL.

EXHIBIT P11: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/12/2020 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.