Kerala High Court
Rajesh.P.K vs State Of Kerala on 2 August, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 28947 OF 2016
PETITIONER/S:
RAJESH.P.K. AGED 41 YEARS,
PART TIME URDU TEACHER, KATAMERI UP SCHOOL,
THODANNUR SUB DISTRICT, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADVS. SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD
SRI.V.E.ABDUL GAFOOR
SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT ANNEX,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.
3 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
THODANNUR, KOZHIKODE - 673 541.
4 THE MANAGER KATAMERI UP SCHOOL,
KATAMERI, KOZHIKODE - 673 542.
SRI T K VIPINDAS, SR. GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HERAD ON
26.7.2024, THE COURT ON 02.08.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.28947 of 2016 2
EASWARAN S., J.
-------------------------
W.P.(C) No.28947 of 2016
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of August 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioner states that he was appointed as part time
Urdu teacher with effect from 1.6.2010. Ext.P1 is the appointment
order. It is pertinent to note that the appointment was a part time
Urdu Teacher. Thereafter, seeking full time benefits, the petitioner
submitted a representation before the 3rd respondent, which was
rejected by Ext.P3.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 3rd
respondent wherein it is pointed out that on the basis of G.O. (P)
No.313/2013 G.Edn. dated 29.11.2013, the benefit of Full Time
Scale cannot be granted to the petitioner.
3. The 1st respondent has also filed a counter affidavit in
lines of the aforesaid contentions.
4. I have heard Sri. T.T. Muhamood, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Sri. A.J. Varghese, the learned
Government Pleader.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed
out that in terms of the judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court in Bindu K Unnithan vs State of Kerala and others [2014
KHC 5044] and also in terms of Ext.R1(a), G.O.(MS)
No.62/73/S.Edn. Dated 02.05.1973, the petitioner is entitled for
the Full Time benefits.
6. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader
pointed out that with reference to the provisions contained under
Chapter XXIII Rule 6 of the Kerala Education Rules (KER for short),
the requirement of the Statute is that only if the school is having
more than 15 periods, a Full Time post can be sanctioned. He
further relied on the provisions of Chapter I Rule 3 of the KER to
contend that, it is for the Government to pass appropriate orders, if
it is brought to the notice of the Government that operation of the
Rules will cause hardship to the teachers. It is in consonance with
the said power that Ext.R1(a) Government Order has been issued.
In view of the fact that Ext.R1(b) Government Order has been
issued modifying the terms and conditions under which the
sanction can be made, the learned Government Pleader pointed out
that the petitioner cannot be granted any benefits. He further
relied on Ext.R1(c) Circular to contend that, for the purpose of
sanctioning the post of Urudu Teacher, the minimum strength as
stipulated has not been changed and therefore the ratio of
1:30/1:35 is to be followed.
7. I have considered the rival submissions raised across the
Bar.
8. No doubt, the learned Government Pleader is justified in
pointing out that the provisions of the KER require a minimum
number of 15 periods for sanctioning of a Full Time Post. However,
it is pertinent to note that, in exercise of the powers contained
under Chapter I Rule (3) of the KER, Ext.R1(a) order was issued by
the Government on 2.5.1973, in which clause (vi) reads as under:
(vi) Conversion of part-time language teachers into full-time
The formula for creating full-time posts in independent high schools
and U.P. schools attached to high schools will be extended to
independent U.P. schools and L.P. schools and U.P. schools with
attached L.P. schools. Besides this, part-time language teachers who
have put in more than 5 years service and have 8 periods of work
shall henceforth be made full-time. The utilisation of the services of
these teachers for teaching regular classes and other subjects and
giving them adequate work will be examined by the Director of Public
Instruction. This will be with effect from the academic year 1973-74.
Thereafter in the year 2013, Ext.R1(b) Government Order has
been issued. Clause XII of Ext.R1(b) reads as follows:
" XII. Language teachers who were given full time benefit
and have less than 15 periods to teach shall be clubbed to
nearby school by the educational officer concerned."
9. A cumulative reading of Exts.R1(a) and R1(b) leaves no
room for doubt that Ext.R1(a) still holds the field. The application
of Ext.R1(b) to the facts of the case is misconceived. Clause XII as
pointed out by the learned Government Pleader does not apply to
the petitioner. On the contrary, it applies to cases where language
teachers were given Full Time Benefit and they have less than 15
periods to teach and in such cases they will be clubbed to nearby
school by the Educational Officers.
10. A reading of Ext.R1(b) cannot lead to a conclusion that
the petitioner is disentitled to the benefit of Full Time Scale. This
Court also notices the fact that a Division Bench of this Court,
despite existence of Ext.R1(b), in Bindu K Unnithan (Supra)
ordered that the teachers are entitled for the benefit of the
Government Order providing them the Full Time Scale.
11. In the result, this Court finds that the petitioner is
entitled to succeed. Ext.P3 is therefore quashed. It is declared that
the petitioner is entitled to be sanctioned with Full Time Benefits in
the light of G.O. (MS) No.62/73/S.Edn. Dated 2.5.1973 with effect
from 1.6.2015. It is further noticed that, this Court, by interim
order dated 7.9.2016, had issued direction to the 3rd respondent
to provisionally sanction the Full Time Benefit to the petitioner in
the light of G.O.(MS) No.62/73 S.Edn dated 2.5.1973 with effect
from 1.6.2015. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the
said benefit has already been granted and the petitioner continues
to receive the same.
Resultantly, on setting aside Ext.P3 and declaring that the
petitioner is entitled to the Full Time Benefits, it is ordered that the
petitioner shall be entitled to receive the said benefits continuously.
Writ petition ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
EASWARAN S.
JUDGE
NS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28947/2016
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE
4TH RESPONDENT ON 01.06.2010.
EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE
HEADMASTER OF KATAMERI UP SCHOOL ON 22.08.2016.
EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C/2469/2016 DATED
23.08.2016 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06.08.2016 IN IA
NO.11181/2016 IN WPC NO.19558/2016.
RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R1(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS)NO.62/73/G.EDN DATED
02.05.1973
EXHIBIT R1(b) A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(P) NO.313/2013/G.EDN DATED
29.11.2013
EXHIBIT R1(c) A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 19.03.2014
