ASHA G. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was regularly appointed as HSA (Hindi) in the 4th respondent's school w.e.f. 1.6.1999 was rendered excess due to fall in student strength in the academic year 2005-2006. She was accommodated as Full Time Lower Grade Hindi teacher and the said adjustment was approved on 27.2.2006, w.e.f 15.7.2005. The petitioner contends that the petitioner, who had been accommodated in the lower post on reduction in number of posts, was entitled to protection of pay and emoluments in terms of Rule 52 of Chapter XIVA KER. The benefit had been granted to the petitioner. However, an audit objection was raised with regard to the fixation of pay of the petitioner on 15.7.2005 in the scale of pay of HSA. Though Exhibit P3 representation was preferred and the DEO had also submitted explanations, the audit objection was detained and the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court. Exhibit P5 Government letter issued on 24.3.2014 was set aside and the matter was directed to be considered on merits by Exhibit P6 judgment of this Court. Ext. P7 Government order was thereafter passed stating that it has been clarified in circular No./1237/Ji/12/G.Edn. dated 18.2.2012 that Rule 52(1) is intended to grant pay protection on reappointment in the same cadre and that the teachers reappointed in lower categories are not eligible for pay protection in the higher scale of pay. It was therefore held that the method of fixation adopted by the DEO is invalid and the request of the petitioner was rejected.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a reading of Rule 52 would make it clear that there is no scope for an interpretation as stated by the Government in the impugned order and that any circular issued, which is against the provisions of rule, would be invalid.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent contending that the petitioner had been reverted as Lower Grade Hindi teacher w.e.f. 15.7.2005 and he was eligible only for fixation of pay in the scale of pay applicable to Lower Grade Hindi teacher as Rs. 6680/- as on 15.7.2005 instead of Rs. 7820/-, which was granted. It is therefore contended that the petitioner's claim that the audit objection is erroneous cannot be sustained.