Kerala High Court
Rukseena P vs State Of Kerala on 22 October, 2024
2024:KER:79012
WP(C) NO. 28587 OF 2017
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 30TH ASWINA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 28587 OF 2017
PETITIONER:
RUKSEENA P.
HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (ARABIC),
KCP HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KAVASSERY,
ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 543.
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.B.HOOD
SRI.AMAL KASHA
SMT.M.ISHA
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION (S) DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD-678 001.
4 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
NEAR TOWN HALL, PALAKKAD-678 001.
5 SUB TREASURY OFFICER
SUB TREASURY OFFICE, ALATHUR,
PALAKKAD-678 682.
2024:KER:79012
WP(C) NO. 28587 OF 2017
2
6 HEADMASTER
KCP HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
KAVASSERY, ALATHUR,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 543.
7 MANAGER
KCP HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
KAVASSERY, ALATHUR,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 543.
BY ADVS.
SRI.G.KEERTHIVAS
SRI.P.R.VENKATESH
SRI.JUSTIN JACOB,SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
22.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:79012
WP(C) NO. 28587 OF 2017
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was appointed as HSA (Arabic) pursuant to
the retirement of the incumbent from a permanent post on
31.03.2020. The appointment as above was with effect from
01.11.2012.
2. Pursuant to the order at Ext.P1, in an appeal filed at the
instance of the Manager of the school to which the petitioner was
appointed, the 3rd respondent herein approved the appointment as
above on part time basis from 01.11.2012 to 31.03.2013 on 'daily
wages basis' and from 03.06.2013 onwards on regular basis.
Though a revision was filed by the petitioner pointing out that the
appointment ought to have been on a regular basis as against a
full time post, the said revision was rejected as evidenced by
Ext.P4 order of the Government.
3. It is in the above situation that the captioned writ
petition is filed by the petitioner essentially pointing out that;
i) The petitioner ought to have been appointed on a regular
basis from 01.11.2012, since the post to which she was
appointed was a full time regular vacancy, consequent to the
retirement of the incumbent on 31.03.2010.
ii) The benefits of the salary during the vacation months of April
2024:KER:79012
WP(C) NO. 28587 OF 2017
and May 2013 are also to be extended.
Iii) The appointment should be as a full time appointment and
not as part time, as ordered in Ext.P1.
4. On 16.09.2017, this Court issued an interim
direction to the respondents to issue revised orders of approval to
the petitioner as part time HSA (Arabic) from 01.11.2012.
5. The above orders issued by this Court has been
implemented pursuant to an order under B3/5527/2017 dated
06.10.2017 issued by the 4th respondent herein produced by the
learned Government Pleader along with a memo dated
04.10.2024. By this order, it is seen that the petitioner's
appointment from 01.11.2012 is made on a regular basis,
however, denying the benefits of the salary during the vacation
months as above. The said proceedings are later rectified by
another order dated 12.11.2019, extending the benefits of the
vacation period salary to the petitioner.
6. Sri T.B.Hood, the learned counsel for the petitioner, points
out that in the light of the subsequent developments, the first
prayer of the petitioner in this Writ Petition need not be considered
anymore. He points out that the direction issued by this Court on
16.09.2017 is to be made absolute and also that the claim of the
2024:KER:79012
WP(C) NO. 28587 OF 2017
petitioner for appointment on a "full time basis" is also to be
considered. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relies on
the order dated 16.01.2021 issued by the 4th respondent, by
which, upon completion of the service of five years in the part time
appointment as above, the petitioner was extended the full-time
benefits.
7. I have heard Sri.T.B.Hood, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Justine Jacob, the learned
Senior Government Pleader.
8. As regards the first prayer of the petitioner, as rightly
contended by learned counsel, insofar as the 4th respondent has
issued the subsequent orders dated 06.10.2017 and 12.11.2019
referred to earlier, the interim order issued on 16.09.2017 requires
to be made absolute. I do so.
9. As regards the second prayer in the Writ Petition
it is seen that the petitioner has specifically pointed out in the Writ
Petition as under:
" it is submitted that the petitioner's appointment
was approved on a part time basis; whereas there
was sufficient effective student strength and number
of periods per week for a full time post of HSA Arabic.
2024:KER:79012
WP(C) NO. 28587 OF 2017
In the School, there are Upper Primary sections also.
There was full time post of HSA in Arabic in the
School from 2004-2005 onwards. This continued till
the academic year 2009-2010. However, in the staff
fixation orders of the subsequent years, the post was
noted as part time. In fact, there were sufficient
students who study Arabic and number of periods for
a full time post of HSA Arabic. There were 74
students and 20 periods in 2009-2010, 85 students
and 24 periods in 2010-2011, 99 students in 2011-
2012, 101 students in 2012-2013, 120 students in
2013-2014, 127 students in 2014-2015, 129 students
in 2015-2016 and 199 students in 2016-2017. For the
current academic year 2017-2018, there are 118
students who pursue studies in Arabic. Hence, there
was no justification on the part of the authorities
under the KER in not approving the petitioner's
appointment in a full time post."
10. On a perusal of the averments contained in the
afore paragraph, I am of the opinion that the petitioner ought to
have been accommodated in a full-time basis rather than on a
part-time basis as is now done by the impugned orders. The fact
that the petitioner is so accommodated against a full-time
vacancy, pursuant to the retirement of the incumbent on
31.03.2010 is also not in dispute. In such circumstances, I am of
the opinion that the second prayer of the petitioner in this writ
petition is also to be allowed.
2024:KER:79012
WP(C) NO. 28587 OF 2017
In such circumstances, I allow the Writ petition as under:-
I. The interim order dated 16.09.2017 is made absolute.
II. The orders at Ext.P1, P4 and the orders produced
along with the memo filed by the Senior Government Pleader
dated 08.06.2017 and 12.09.2017 would stand modified by
declaring that the appointment as above of the petitioner is
on a 'full-time basis'.
III. The respondents to pass a consequential revised
order and also extend all available benefits to the petitioner
within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
HARISANKAR V. MENON
JUDGE
SPV
2024:KER:79012
WP(C) NO. 28587 OF 2017
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28587/2017
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 7-8-2013 ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT APPROVING THE
APPOINTMENT OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER WITH
THE APPROVAL OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 14-
12-2015 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
WPC.NO.19762/2017.
