MENON LAXMI BHUVANENDRA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main point that arises for decision in this Writ Petition is whether the Government are bound to pay salary to a private college teacher, working in a post sanctioned by the University in disregard of binding statutory provisions.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are the following: The writ petitioner is a Lecturer in Journalism, taking classes for B.A. Malayalam students in Farook College, Kozhikode. It is a College affiliated to the Calicut University. Initially, the College was conducting B.A. Course with Malayalam and Sociology as double main subjects (Pattern II). A proposal was mooted for bifurcation of that course into two degree courses, namely, B.A. Malayalam and B.A. Sociology, which was supported by the University as also the Government. The Government on the motion of the Calicut University, issued Ext. P1 communication dated 13-11-1990, permitting bifurcation of the double main course into two single main courses during the academic year 1990-91, "subject to the specific condition that no expenditure now or in future is involved in this case". Later, the Government issued Ext. P2 communication, deleting the words "or in future in Ext. P1. The result was that the bifurcation was "subject to the specific condition that no expenditure now is involved in this case". Pursuant to the bifurcation of the course, B.A. Malayalam and B.A. Sociology course were started in the College. A new subject, Journalism, was included in the syllabus of B.A. Malayalam course. There were six hours for the said subject. So, creation of a part-time post for the said subject was permissible in terms of the relevant University ordinance and statutes. Therefore, the College invited applications for appointment to one post of part-time Lecturer in Journalism, as per Ext. P3 notification. The petitioner was a candidate for selection to the said post, which came under the open merit quota. The selection committee as per Ext. P4 minutes, included her in the merit list as Rank No. 1. Pursuant to the said selection, the petitioner was appointed as part-time Lecturer with effect from 16-9-1996. The said appointment was approved by the University, as per Ext. P5 proceedings dated 8-1 -1997. In the meantime, the Syndicate of the Calicut University at its meeting held on 29-7-1995, as per item No. 95.315, resolved to sanction full-time posts of Lecturers in departments where there is only one post, regardless of the work load. The said decision was modified by the Syndicate at its meeting held on 28-10-1995, as per item No. 95.314, in the following manner: "In all the newly started colleges, full-time posts of Lecturers be sanctioned in cases where there will be only one post in a department, regardless of the quantum of work" (see Ext. P22). The University by Ext. P7 order, accorded sanction for creation of a full-time post of Lecturer in Journalism, by abolishing the part-time post already created, so as to make the total staff strength in the department of Journalism as one with effect from 23-4-1999. The management of the petitioner s College by Ext. P8, had already appointed her in the full-time post of Lecturer in Journalism with effect from 23-4-1999, as per proceedings dated 25-9-1999. The said appointment was approved by the University as per Ext. P9 order dated 4-2-2000, with effect from 23-4-1999. But, when salary was claimed on behalf of the petitioner, the Deputy Director of Education, by Ext. P10 communication, informed the Registrar of the University that the creation of the full-time post was irregular. It was pointed out that the bifurcation of B.A. Malayalam and B.A. Sociology double main course in Farook College was permitted subject to the specific condition that no expenditure is involved on the part of the Government as well as the University. The Deputy Director further pointed out that the proposal for creation of a full-time post was declined by the Government and concurrence for creation of a part-time post for a work load of six hours was granted. So, the present creation of the full-time post and approval of the same by the University was irregular. It was also brought to the notice of the University that the creation of the post with effect from a day during the mid-summer vacation is unjustified. Accordingly, the Deputy Director requested for review of that order. The University, by Ext. P11 communication dated 27-11 -2000 replied, stating that its action is permissible, in view of Ext. P1 communication issued by the Government. But, by Ext. P12 order dated 18-12-2000, the date of effect of approval was modified by the University as 1-6-1999 instead of 23-4-1999." Even thereafter, when salary was not paid to her, the petitioner filed Ext. P13 representation before the Government. The petitioner submits, in the case of several other persons similarly placed like her, the University has permitted creation of full-time posts. A list of such colleges wherein part-time posts were converted into full-time posts. on the strength of Exts. P22 and P19, is produced as Ext. P6. The petitioner submits, the denial of full-time salary to her by the Government is unjustified. She also relies 6n a decision of this Court in O.P. No. 29193/2002, which was upheld by the Division Bench in W.A. No. 2594/2005. Based on that decision, the Government issued order dated 23-9-2006, directing payment of salary to the petitioner in O.P. No. 29193/2002, it is submitted. So, the petitioner prayed for payment of salary of the full-time post to her with effect from 1-6-1999. The Syndicate of the University, in the meantime, at its meeting held on 21-6-2003, as per item No. 2003.313, decided to make applicable Ext. P22 decision to the existing colleges also. This is evident from Ext. P19 communication of the Registrar of the University dated 26-7-2003 to the Principal of Farook College. So, the petitioner points out that all the hurdles in her way in getting salary have, now, been removed.

(3.) Mr. K.S. Madhusoodanan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, took us through the relevant statutory provisions, in support of the claim of the writ petitioner. Reference was made to statute 14 of the Calicut University (Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of Non-teaching Staff) First Statutes, 1979. The relevant portions of statute 14 read as follows: