Athira P vs The State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 4178 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
 FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 10TH CHAITHRA, 1945
                    WP(C) NO. 17030 OF 2019
PETITIONER/S:

            ATHIRA P., AGED 31 YEARS
            PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER, S.N.T.T.I.,
            CHERUTHURUTHY, THRISSUR
            BY ADV P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENT/S:

    1       THE STATE OF KERALA,
            REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
            GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001
    2       THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
            OFFICE OF THE D.E.O., CHAVAKKAD - 680 506
    3       THE MANAGER, S.N.T.T.I.,
            CHERUTHURUTHY, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 679531
    4       THE HEADMASTER, S.N.T.T.I,
            CHERUTHURUTHY, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 679531

            (ADDL.R4 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
            31.03.2023)
            BY ADVS.
            ARAVINDA KUMAR BABU T.K.
            SANDRA SUNNY(K/926/2020)
            ARUN KUMAR M.A(K/1197/2021)
OTHER PRESENT:
          SRI.K.M.FAISAL, GP
     THIS    WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON   31.03.2023,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                       2-
W.P.(C). No. 17030 of 2019



                             P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                             ======================================================

                              W.P.(C) No. 17030 of 2019
                         =============================================================

                    Dated this the 31st day of March, 2023

                                          JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

"(i) To issue a writ of certiorari, or other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash Ext.P4.

(ii) To issue respondents a writ, order or direction directing to sanction the leave applied for by the petitioner. and

(iii) to issue such other writ, order or direction as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." (sic)

2. The writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P4 order by

which an application of the petitioner for leave without allowance

is rejected by the Government for the sole reason that the

petitioner is a part time teacher.

3. Heard the counsel for the petitioner, the Government

Pleader and also the counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent.

3-

W.P.(C). No. 17030 of 2019

4. The short point raised by the petitioner is that there is

no provision which prohibit the grant of leave without allowance

to a part time teacher, when the appointment of the part time

teacher is approved. The counsel for the 3rd respondent also

support the case of the petitioner to the effect that there is no

provision which prohibit granting leave without allowance to a

part time teacher. The counsel for the petitioner relied on Rule 88

of Part I KSR in which it is stated that leave without allowance

can be granted to any officer in regular employment in special

circumstances. The counsel also relied on Appendix XII C clause

4, which says that permanent officers and non permanent officers

in regular service of Government, who have completed probation

in the date in which they are working including entry cadre may

be granted leave without allowance under these rules. There is no

dispute that the petitioner is a permanent part time teacher.

Hence, I think there is some force in the argument of the

petitioner. This point is not considered in Ext.P4 order by the 4-

W.P.(C). No. 17030 of 2019

Government. When there is no prohibition in granting leave

without allowance, I think the matter is to be reconsidered by the

Government. To facilitate the Government to pass fresh orders,

Ext.P4 can be set aside. The further grievance of the petitioner is

that the petitioner is not given increment and pay revision

benefits, because the leave is not regularised. Excluding the

period of leave, the same can be calculated and disbursed.

Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following

manner:

1. Ext.P4 is set aside.

2. The 1st respondent is directed to reconsider the matter after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of a stamped certified copy of this judgment.

3. The 4th respondent is directed to submit a proposal for sanctioning fixation of pay, pay revision arrears, annual 5-

W.P.(C). No. 17030 of 2019

increment due to the petitioner etc, excluding the period of leave without allowance to the 2nd respondent, within one month, and if such a proposal is received, the 2 nd respondent will pass consequential order, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of the proposal.

sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE das 6-

W.P.(C). No. 17030 of 2019

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17030/2019

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.22556/2018 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT MANAGER EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT DATED 01.02.2019 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT