LAWS(KER)-1976-4-3

STATE OF KERALA Vs. DEVASY MANJOORAN

Decided On April 01, 1976
STATE OF KERALA Appellant
V/S
DEVASY MANJOORAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the State of Kerala and the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education from the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court allowing O. P. No. 657 of 1975. The 1st respondent herein was the petitioner in the Original Petition. The 2nd respondent is the Registrar, University of Kerala. The first prayer in the Original Petition was "To pay forthwith to the petitioner all the arrears of salary and other emoluments due to him as an Additional Professor (I Grade) in the Post-Graduate Department of the College, at the recognised scale of pay for the post, as revised from time to time and with all due increments, accruing monthly from the 1st of September 1972, together with compensatory interest thereon from such dates calculated at a minimum rate of 18% per annum". The learned Judge by the Judgment under appeal has allowed the earlier part of this prayer but has declined the compensatory interest claimed in the prayer.

(2.) It will be useful to refer very briefly to the past history of this petition. There was an earlier Original Petition by the 1st respondent, O.P. No 1491 of 1973 which contained three prayers. The questions that arose for consideration in that Original Petition were formulated in the judgment in these terms:

(3.) After the case was heard, judgment was dictated in court on the 19th of December, 1973. Before the judgment was finalised and signed, the petitioner in that Original Petition moved C. M. P. No. 15852 of 1973 for withdrawing the 3rd prayer in the petition. This petition was heard and allowed on the 31st of January, 1974. The order is reported in 1975 KLT 348 . It was also directed by the order that the "question arising from prayer No. 3 is thus left open". Consequent on the allowing of the petition, the discussion relating to prayer No. 3 in the judgment as originally dictated were deleted and after dealing with the first three questions the judgment stated in Para.12: