Kerala High Court
N.S.S.Colleges Central Committee vs State Of Kerala on 23 May, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 6774 OF 2016
PETITIONER:
N.S.S.COLLEGE'S CENTRAL COMMITTEE
REPRESENTED BY ITS EDUCATION SECRETARY,
SRI.R.PRASANNA KUMAR, N.S.S.HEAD OFFICE,
PERUNNAI, CHANGANACHERRY.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.GOPAL
SRI.B.MURALEEDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,HIGHER
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 N.NIKHIL
S/O.NARAYANAN.V(LATE)MANANGODE HOUSE,
NENMARA.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678508.
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
SRI.V.K.SUNIL, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.6774 of 2016
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 6774 of 2016
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2024
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following
reliefs:
"i) to issue a writ of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ, direction, or order, quashing Exhibit
P6 order GO(Rt)No.230/2016/H.Edn. dated 22.1.2016
of the 1st respondent directing the petitioner to
consider the application of the 3rd respondent for
appointment under compassionate scheme in any of
the colleges under the Management in the existing or
next arising vacancy;
ii) to issue any other appropriate writ
direction or order, which this Hon'ble court deems fit to
grant in the circumstances of the case."[SIC]
2. Petitioner is the Manager of all the private aided
Colleges under the Corporate Management of Nair
Service Society. It is submitted that, all the Colleges
have entered direct payment agreement with the
Government. The 3rd respondent's father, late
V.Narayanan was working as Lab Assistant at N.S.S.
College, Nenmara. He died on 02.09.2012. It is
submitted that N.S.S. College, Nenmara is affiliated with
Calicut University. It is also submitted that, there is no
provision in the direct payment agreement or in the
Calicut University Act or in the Calicut University
(Conditions of Service of Teaching and Non-teaching
Staffs) First Statutes, 1979 to provide appointment to
the dependent of deceased employees of the College
under the compassionate employment scheme. As per
Ext.P1, it was ordered to implement compassionate
appointment in aided colleges and further authorizing
the Director of Collegiate Education to submit draft
guidelines. The same was challenged by the petitioner
by filing W.P(C)No.28970 of 2013 which was considered
by the Division Bench along with W.A.No.248 of 2012
filed by the petitioner against the judgment of the
learned Single Judge in W.P(C)No.30738 of 2004. The
challenge against the guide line was negatived by this
Court as per Ext.P2 judgment. The Division Bench
reserved the right of the petitioner to challenge the
guidelines as and when it is issued if it is against the
interest of the petitioner. Subsequently, the guide line
was issued as per G.O.(P) No.10/2020/H.Edn. dated
17.02.2020. In the Government Order, it is clearly
stated that the same will be implemented with effect
from 07.10.2013. The prayer of the petitioner is to
quash Ext.P6 order by which there is a direction to
consider the application of the 3 rd respondent under the
compassionate appointment.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
4. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that
Ext.P6 order is unsustainable for the simple reason that
as per G.O.(P)No.10/2020/H.Edn. dated 17.02.2020,
the guide lines for compassionate appointment is
implemented with effect from 07.10.2013. Admittedly,
the father of the 3rd respondent died on 02.09.2012. If
that be the case, the application for compassionate
appointment of the 3rd respondent can not be
entertained even as per the new guide lines. I think
there is force in the above argument. In the light of the
above submission, I think Ext.P6 is to be set aside. If
there is any surviving grievance to the 3rd respondent,
the 3rd respondent is free to agitate the same
separately.
Therefore, this Writ petition is disposed of setting
aside Ext.P6 order.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
DM
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6774/2016
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE
GOVERNMENT
GO(MS)NO.6363/13/H.EDN.DATED
7.10.2013
P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT
DATED 1.10.2014 IN W.P(C)28970 OF
2013 AND CONNECTED CASES`
P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY
THE PETITIONER DATED 13.2.2015
P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 30.3.2015
P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
27.5.2015 IN W.P(C)15598 OF 2015
P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
GO(RT)NO.230/2016/H.EDN.DATED
22.1.2016.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
