Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

Dr.K. Kesavan Namboodiri vs The State Of Kerala on 21 December, 1999

       

  

  

 
 
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                          PRESENT:

      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

   THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/27TH MAGHA 1933

                WP(C).No. 33095 of 2005 (M)
                 ---------------------------


   PETITIONER:
   ==========

        DR.K. KESAVAN NAMBOODIRI,
        SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, MALAYALAM (RETD.)
        S.S.V. COLLEGE, VALAYANCHIRANGARA, PERUMBAVOOR
        RESIDING AT `SUDARSANA', BROADWAY, PERUMBAVOOR.

        BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN


   RESPONDENTS:
   ============

   1.   THE STATE OF KERALA,
        REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
        HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

   2.   THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
        THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

   3.   THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
        ERNAKULAM.

   4.   THE PRINCIPAL,
        S.S.V. COLLEGE, VALAYANCHIRANGARA P.O.,PERUMBAVOOR

        R3 BY SMT.LOWSY A, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
        R4 BY SRI.K.J.KURIACHAN
        R4 BY SMT.VIJI V.NAMBOOTHIRY


   THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
   16-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
   FOLLOWING:

JV

WPC NO: 33095/2005


                           APPENDIX


PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

P1   :    COPY OF THE PH.D DEGREE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
          M.G.UNIVERSITY

P2   :    COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO.171/99/H.EDN. DATED 21.12.1999

P3   :    COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 17598/04 DATED 28.07.2004

P4   :    COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
          22.09.2004

P5   :    COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.12.2004 SENT BY THE
          MANAGER OF THE COLLEGE.

P6   :    COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
          25.04.2003

P7   :    COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.06.2005 IN WPC
          NO.16726/2005

P8   :    COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
          24.10.2005



RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L



                                          /TRUE COPY/



                                          P.A. TO JUDGE



JV



                       T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
                    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      W.P.(C) No. 33095 of 2005-M
                    - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
              Dated this the 16th day of February, 2012

                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by the denial of benefits consequent on the grant of two advance increments, after acquisition of Ph.D. The respondents have re-fixed the scale of pay of the petitioner after completion of five years in the Selection Grade and in that process, disallowed the benefit of advance increments. The petitioner initially joined the College on 13.2.1979. He acquired Ph.D. on 5.8.1997. The revised scale of pay as per the U.G.C. Scheme 1996 was implemented as per Ext.P2 order. At that point of time he was working as Lecturer Selection Grade and his pay was also revised with effect from 1.1.1996. On completion of five years of service as Lecturer Selection Grade, the pay of the petitioner was fixed at Rs.14,940/- with effect from 13.2.2000. It is pointed out that the said benefit is granted based on Appendix IA of G.O.(P) No.171/99/H.Edn. dated 21.12.1999.

2. Ext.P4 is the proceedings issued granting two advance increments. In fact, the petitioner was not granted the same initially and he approached this Court and by judgment Ext.P3, this Court directed the grant of advance WPC.33095/2005 2 increments. Thereafter Ext.P4 order was issued in the year 2004. Later, it appeared that the department did not continue to give the benefit of advance increments from the date on which he has granted super stage in the Selection Grade as on 1.2.2000. Therefore, the Manager forwarded Ext.P5 pointing out the anomaly, at the request of the petitioner and for seeking to continue the benefit of two advance increments consequent on acquiring Ph.D. throughout his service. This has finally been rejected by Ext.P8 order which is under challenge in this writ petition.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially the said benefit of two advance increments was not granted which led to the filing of W.P.(C) No.17598/2004 wherein, in para 2 of the judgment, the entitlement of it was found in favour of the petitioner. There is a specific finding that the sanction of selection grade and higher grade will not stand in the way of the claim for grant of two advance increments as and when a person acquires Ph.D. It is therefore submitted that the due benefits will have to be reckoned independently and the grant of selection grade and fixation of higher grade after five years which is a benefit granted as per Appendix 1A of Ext.P2, cannot be a reason to take away the grant of two advance WPC.33095/2005 3 increments consequent on acquisition of Ph.D.

5. Para 6.19 of Ext.P2 states that " a teacher will be eligible for two advance increments as and when she/he acquires a Ph.D. degree in her/his service career." This Court, in Ext.P3, paragraph 2 relating to the claim of the petitioner, held as follows:

"There is no dispute that the petitioners obtained their Ph.D. degree while they were working as Selection Grade Lecturers with pay as Lecturer Selection grade and they have been granted their higher grade also. But that will not stand in the way of the petitioners getting their original increments since any teacher in service is eligible for two advance increments as and when he acquires Ph.D. degree irrespective of the time or stage of acquisition of the Ph.D. degree."

Therefore, even at that point of time this Court noticed that Selection Grade was granted and a higher grade was also added later, but this will not affect the right to claim advance increments on acquisition of Ph.D. A reading of Ext.P4 order will show that sanction has been accorded for the grant of advance increments to the petitioner with effect from the date of award of Ph.D. Evidently, therefore, the grant of benefit based on Ext.P3 judgment as per Ext.P4, could not have been dropped in the midway to the detriment of the petitioner.

WPC.33095/2005 4

6. In para 4 of the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent what is stated is that "those who were in a position as Lecturers (Sel.Gr)/ Reader as on 1.1.1996 will be made in a manner that they get their pay fixed at the minimum of Rs.14,940/- in the revised scale as and when they complete five years in the grade." But that has nothing to do with the entitlement of the petitioner for grant of two advance increments.

7. In fact, I had occasion to consider the very same issue in the judgment in W.P.(C) No.22086/2009 wherein in para 11, it was held as follows:

"The claim for payment of advance increments is a right that is conferred on the teachers like the petitioner. The entitlement of the same is under the UGC Scheme. Having conferred such a benefit, it cannot be stopped merely because the petitioner is getting the Selection Grade on a future date. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the benefit, the petitioner is getting by way of Selection Grade promotion is on completion of 16 years of service. Both are unconnected. The Division Bench in Ext.P4 judgment clearly held that "appellants do not dispute respondent's entitlement for advance increments payable on acquisition of Ph.D. Degree from 7.4.1997."

The same dictum applies as far as the petitioner also is concerned. Evidently, based on Ext.P3 judgment, the benefit was granted which could WPC.33095/2005 5 not have been withdrawn at all.

8. Therefore, Ext.P8 order is quashed. The petitioner has already retired from service. Thus, it requires a revision of the scale of pay as well as pension and other benefits, by reckoning the due benefit. Appropriate orders will be passed sanctioning the same and the benefits will be disbursed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is allowed as above. No costs.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/