VALSALA KUMARI DEVI M Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was initially appointed as a High School Assistant (Social Studies) with effect from 13/7/1990, as seen from Ext.P-1. The petitioner states that she satisfied the eligibility conditions and possessed the qualifications prescribed for appointment to the post of Higher Secondary School Teacher (History) (hereinafter referred to as 'HSST(History)'), in terms of the G.O. dtd. 27/6/1990. When a vacancy arose in the school during the academic year 2000-2001, the petitioner, as well as one Sri.M.K.Aravindhakshan Nambiar (HSAs working in the school) applied for selection to the post of HSST(History) against the said vacancy. Though the petitioner was senior to Sri.M.K.Aravindhakshan Nambiar, the 4th respondent-Manager promoted and posted Sri.M.K.Aravindhakshan Nambiar as Higher Secondary School Teacher with effect from 1/8/2000, overlooking the seniority and suitability of the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the same before this Court. The challenge was repelled by the Single Bench as well as the Division Bench, and the matter was taken up before the Supreme Court wherein, by Ext.P-2 judgment in Civil Appeal No. 4480/2007, the Supreme Court found that the petitioner was entitled to be appointed as HSST. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was allowed, and direction was given to the respondents to pass appropriate orders appointing the petitioner as HSST(History) with retrospective effect from 1/8/2000 notionally and to grant fixation in the scale of pay of HSST accordingly. It is specified that the arrears, consequent on the same, less the amount received as salary as HSA, will also be disbursed accordingly.

(2.) When the appointment order was issued on 16/2/2008, pursuant to the orders of the Supreme Court, which is marked as Ext.P-3, the second round of litigation started as the appointment was approved only with effect from 16/2/2008. This led the petitioner to file WP(C). No.9508/2009, which was partly allowed by judgment dtd. 22/2/2011 (Ext.P-5) directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner as HSST(History) with retrospective effect from 1/8/2000 notionally and to grant fixation in the scale of pay of HSST. It was made clear in the said judgment that, since the petitioner was working as an HSA, she would be entitled only to the difference of salary payable to the post of HSST and that the same would not affect the seniority of Higher Secondary School Teachers appointed earlier than the date of Ext.P-13 therein, which was 16/2/2008.

(3.) A writ appeal was filed against the said judgment as W.A.No.421/2011, and by the judgment of the Division Bench dtd. 23/6/2011 (Ext.P-6), it was found that as far as the claim of the petitioner for seniority is concerned, going by the notional promotion granted to her, she is eligible for all benefits with effect from the date of arising of the vacancy, as she would have been appointed on that day had a right decision been taken. The management's contention that she be ranked above the other Higher Secondary School Teachers in the school was rejected again, holding that she would have been senior to them had she been appointed on 1/8/2000 (the date of arising of the vacancy). In that view of the matter, the writ appeal was allowed, and her entitlement to senior was found with the consequence granting her retrospective promotion and reckoned the petitioner's seniority with effect from 1/8/2000 along with notional promotion and other benefits granted with effect from that date. The said order was complied with, and the Government issued an order dtd. 24/11/2011 that fixed the seniority of the petitioner as HSST with effect from 1/8/2000 and the period during which she was notionally promoted was directed to be reckoned for all service benefits.