THANKAM NAIR Vs. DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged show cause notice dated 1 1/09/1998 issued by the Directorate of Education. Petitioner is working asVice Principal in the school run by Kerala Education Society. She was appointed inthe school on probation as head Mistress (Primary) w.e.f. July 1976, and wasmiddle school w.e.f. 1st My, 1987 in the pay scale of Rs.550-900/. School wasultimately granted grant in aid by the directorate of education from class I to Class VIIIw.e.f. 31/08/1989. After this grant in aid was given to the school, the pay of thestaff working in the school was fixed. petitioner was also given the pay scale of HeadMistress (Middle) w.e.f. 7/09/1993. petitioner alongwith other teachersrepresented that the service rendered by them in the prior period should also becounted for fixation of their pay and for the purpose of giving them pensionary andother retiremental benefits. As this benefit was not given a number of writ petitionswere filed in this Court. First such petition being Civil . .rit Petition No. 4512 of 1997in which order was passed for counting the service rendered by the petitioner prior tothe date of recognition also and fixed the pay accordingly from the date of their initialappointment. To the same effect was the decision taken in civil writ Petition No. 4958of 1997. These orders were passed based on the judgment dated 26/07/1996passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 2868 of 1991 against which Special Leave Petitionwas dismissed on 23/07/1997. The effect of this judgment is that the servicerendered by such teachers prior to the date of recognition shall be counted for allpurposes including pay fixation.

(2.) Petitioner in the meantime was promoted to the post of Vice Principal on therecommendation of DPC and was promoted to the said post w.e.f. 13/11/1997. While she was working as Vice Principal impugned show cause notice dated 11/09/1998 was issued in which it is mentioned that during the proceedingsof DPC the Managing committee of the school misrepresented the fact that petitioneris working as Head Mistress (Middle) for the last 10 years which is contrary to recordand on the s,aid misrepresentation offacts she was promoted as Vice Principal of theschool. It is further mentioned that it is an error apparent on record and therefore it isproposed to dedare that proceedings of DPC dated 13/11/1997 are void.Show cause notice was given as to why petitioner be not reverted to the post of HeadMistress (Middle).

(3.) It is obvious that while calculating the period of 10 years the Directorate ofEducation is taking into consideration the period of service rendered by the petitioneronly after the recognition and not the prior period. This is clearly not correct position inlaw and this aspect is already finally determined in the judgment in various casesmention to which is already made above. On that basis the petitioner's service asHead Mistress (Middle) has to be counted from the date she was promoted to thesaid post i.e. 6/05/1987 and therefore she had put in 10 years of service whenDPC was held on 13/11/1997. The show cause notice is therefore clearlyerroneous and is hereby quashed. Rule is made absolute. Since the petitioner isworking as Vice Principal and was promoted by interim order passed by this Court inthis writ petition, the effect of quashing of the show cause notice is that petitionerwould continue to work as Vice Principal.There shall be no order as to costs.