BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Writ Petitions involve a common question of law and are therefore being disposed of by a common judgment. In O.P. No, 119/76 there are four petitioners. Petitioners 1, 3 and 4 were appointed as Headmasters respectively on 17th February 1955, 5th October 1956 and 6th May 1955. The second petitioner was appointed as teacher on 5th July 1956. In O. P. No. 3923/76 the petitioner was appointed as Headmaster on 1st November 1954. In O.P. No. 3946/76 the petitioner was appointed as teacher on 23rd April 1956. In O.P. No. 3987/76 the petitioner was appointed as Headmaster on 4th November

(2.) The petitioners were appointed as untrained Headmasters under the "Relief of educated unemployed" scheme sponsored by the Madras Government during the first five year plan. All the District Board Schools were taken over by Government with effect from 1st October 1957 and therefore the former District Board teachers including single teacher school teachers became Government employees from 1st October 1957. With the coming into force of the Kerala Panchayats Act. 32 of 1960, the Madras District Boards Act, 1920, the Madras Village Panchayats Act, 1950 etc. were repealed by S.151. Under S.151(3) all the employees of the District Board, became on the repeal of the Madras District Boards Act, employees of the Government, subject to such conditions of service as the Government may fix.

(3.) Admittedly the writ petitioners had no training qualifications when they were appointed. Their appointments were under peculiar circumstances. They were appointed as untrained teachers and they continued to be so when these schools were taken by the Government. The question is whether they can, by virtue of this special benefit extended to them, press their claim for seniority against those who had the necessary qualifications when appointed. The counsel for the State would contend that the petitioners claim cannot be sustained since all of them were untrained teachers. On the other hand the petitioners counsel would contend that there are sufficient materials in the case to indicate that the Government had accepted the period of service of the untrained teachers appointed prior to 10th April 1958 for reckoning their seniority.