MANAGER Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are the Manager, UPSA and LPSA in an aided School, have filed this writ petition, aggrieved by the denial of approval to the appointments of petitioners 2 and 3 on regular scale of pay with effect from the initial dates of their appointment. The Manager had appointed petitioners 2 and 3 as per Exts.P1 and P2 orders on 4.6.2007 against additional division vacancies. Their appointments were approved in the year 2012 as per endorsement in the respective orders of appointment with effect from 1.6.2011 on introduction of teachers package. Thereafter on the basis of Ext.P6 order in the revision petition filed before Government, the approval was revised as per endorsement in Exts.P7 and P8 orders, approving their appointments for the first academic year from 4.6.2007 on daily wages and from 2.6.2008 onwards on regular scale of pay, without vacation salary. The petitioners have filed this writ petition aggrieved by the action of the Assistant Educational Officer in limiting their approval on daily wages for the first academic year.

(2.) The question of approval of appointments against permanent vacancies of teachers is well settled by the judgment of the apex court in the judgment in State of Kerala vs. Sneha Cherian : 2013 (1) KLT 755 as explained by this Court in Nair Service Society vs. State of Kerala : 2013 (4) KLT 921 and it is held that such appointments are liable to be approved on regular scale of pay. In the above circumstances, orders of approval denying approval to the appointment of petitioners on regular scale of pay with effect from the date of their initial appointment is illegal. There shall be a direction to the 4th respondent to issue revised orders approving the appointment of the petitioners on regular scale of pay with effect from 4.6.2007 onwards continuously and to grant them all consequential benefits.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though orders were issued as per endorsement in Exts.P7 and P8 orders in October 2017 the benefits are not granted to the petitioners. In the above circumstances, all the consequential benefits due to the petitioners shall be granted within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.