STATE OF KERALA Vs. BHASKARA PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We do not find sufficient reason to disturb the judgment of the learned Judge, who allowed O.P. No. 1812 of 1975, filed to quash Ext. P2 order of the Government and directed that the writ petitioner is entitled to count his seniority with reference to his continuous service in the grade of High school Assistants in accordance with R.37 of Chap.14A of the Kerala Education Rules.

(2.) The writ petitioner was appointed as a Hindi Teacher on 30th June 1952 and promoted as a Higher Grade Language Teacher on 28th November 1952. He acquired the B.A. degree in 1956, the B. Ed. degree in 1960 and the M. A. degree in 1964. By G.O. Rt. No. 3151/Edn., dated 8th November 1966, the Higher and Lower Grade Language Teachers were redesignated as High School Assistants (Language). In Chap.23, R.3 of the Kerala Education Rules, the designations for the various posts have been specified. The Headmaster is seen as one category, the High School Assistants is seen as a 2nd category, made up of: (1) High School Assistants (Language); (2) Upper Primary School Assistant; (3) Language teacher, and so on. The learned Government pleader stressed that a dichotomy was seen between the High School Assistants (Language) and the other generic category of High School Assistants. This it was said, would justify their being counted as two separate units and also the practice in the Department of keeping two separate seniority lists for the two separate posts. The writ petitioner was ranked No. 1 in the list of Language Teachers. After his graduation, his rank was No. 7 in the list of graduate teachers or High School Assistants. There was a circular of the Government which required the Language Teachers to be given an option either to continue as Language Teachers or to be included in the list of Graduate Teachers. The option had to be exercised on or before 30th June 1967; and once exercised, was to be final. The petitioner is stated to have opted on 15th May 1967 to remain in the list of Language Teachers. His name was therefore deleted from the list of graduate teachers from 1st September 1959. The petitioner filed a representation to reckon his length of service as Hindi Teacher in counting his seniority as High School Assistant. The representation was dated 29th November 1971 as seen from the order thereof viz., Ext. P-2 by which it was rejected. In brief, the Government took the view that there was no ground to disturb the practice of assigning seniority and rank among other High School Assistants, based on the length of graduate service. The learned Judge disagreed and quashed Ext. P-2. The Government has appealed.

(3.) We think the view taken by the learned Judge is correct. Chap.14A R.37(1) provides: