STATE OF KERALA Vs. K. RATNAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Government has appealed against the decision of a learned Judge who quashed Exts. P10 and P12 orders fixing the writ petitioner's pay while on deputation as the pay drawn by her in her substantive appointment as Lecturer at the time of deputation and not the higher scale of pay as Professor to which post she had been provisionally promoted at the time of deputation; and Ext. P12 order which rejected the petitioner's representation that she was entitled to be paid at the higher rate of pay applicable to a Professor.

(2.) The writ petitioner was a Senior Lecturer with a II Class in the D.A.M. course (Diploma in Ayurvedic Medicine). Being only a II Class graduate she was unqualified for promotion as Professor which required a I Class Degree. In 1971 she was selected for appointment to the Postgraduate Course. But as the terms for deputation were unattractive and as she was then entitled to only a stipend of Rs. 200 she discontinued her course. By Ext. P-5 G.O. dated 25th August 1972, the terms of deputationists and the monetary benefits to which they were entitled while undergoing the postgraduate course in Ayurveda were bettered. The relevant portion of Ext. P-5 dated 25th August 1972 which accomplished this ran thus:

(3.) We are unable to agree with the reasoning and the conclusion of the learned Judge. The learned Government Pleader rightly pointed out that the order is essentially governed by rule 26 of Part I of the K.S.R. The said