Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 892 Ker
Judgement Date : 11 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 21TH POUSHA, 1942
WA.No.886 OF 2020
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 17-10-2018 IN WP(C) 32060/2017(F) OF
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPREENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
2 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
KOZHIKODE 673 001
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 3 & 4:
1 ANEES AHAMED E.K.
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
POCKER SAHIB MEMORIAL ORPHANAGE COLLEGE, TIRURANGADI,
MALAPPURAM 676 306
2 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O,
THENHIPALAM 573 635
3 THE MANAGER,
POCKER SAHIB MEMORIAL ORPHANAGE COLLEGE,
TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM 676 306
R1 BY ADV. SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL
R1 BY ADV. SRI.ISAAC KURUVILLA ILLIKAL
R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. A.J. VARGHESE-SR. G.P.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.01.2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA No.886/2020 -2-
JUDGMENT
DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
Shaffique, J:
This appeal is filed by the State challenging judgment dated
17-10-2018 in W.P (C) No.32060/2017 in which the learned Single
Judge issued the following directions:-
"The petitioner shall be granted salary from the current month onwards without any delay. The arrears shall be paid within three months. If the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education propose to conduct an enquiry that shall be concluded within two months. The payment of salary would depend upon such enquiry. No costs."
2. The petitioner had a case that he was appointed in the
Department of Physical Education, Pocker Sahib Memorial Orphanage
College, Tirurangadi against a sanctioned post on 10-10-2014.
However, he was not paid salary and therefore he had approached
this court.
3. Contention urged by the learned Government Pleader on
behalf of the State is that the appointment of the petitioner was not
against a sanctioned post.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent however placed
reliance on certain additional documents produced along with counter
affidavit dated 17-12-2020. It is submitted that as per Annexure-I staff
fixation statement for the year 2008-2009, the students' strength was
above 1000 and two posts of physical education teacher were
sanctioned. Only one person was working at the relevant time. One
Shukkoor Illath was appointed. He was not paid salary. Therefore he
had approached this court by filing W.P (C) No.28154/2011. The
learned Single Judge by judgment dated 16-01-2017 having observed
that in so far as the students' strength is more than 1000, and since
the University had approved the appointment of an additional teacher,
the said petitioner was entitled to receive salary. It is submitted that
Sri. Shukkoor Illath resigned from the said job and thereafter the
petitioner was appointed in the said vacancy. It is brought to our
notice that as per the directions issued by the Government, staff
fixation orders were prepared by the Deputy Director of Collegiate
Education, which has been counter signed by the competent
authorities. As per staff fixation order dated 20-08-2010, there are
two sanctioned posts for Physical Education Department. Further,
when the aforesaid Shukkoor resigned, one post became vacant and
accordingly the Government as per letter dated 22-07-2014 appointed
a nominee for conducting selection to fill up various vacancies
including one physical education teacher in the said college, pursuant
to which, the ranked list was prepared and Sri. Anees Ahamed, the
writ petitioner, was appointed with effect from 10-10-2014.
5. Learned Government Pleader submitted that there is no
sanctioned post. But the fact remains that the Director of Collegiate
Education had approved the staff strength as evident from Annexure-
III and thereafter the Government appointed a nominee for
conducting selection and by virtue of Annexure-V, the petitioner had
been selected.
6. Apparently this is a case in which the petitioner had been
appointed against a sanctioned post. Therefore, we do not think that
the learned Government Pleader is justified in taking a contrary
contention. Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, we don't
think that any error had been committed by the learned Single Judge.
The writ appeal is hence dismissed.
(Sd/-) A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.
(Sd/-) GOPINATH P., JUDGE.
AMG
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!