A.KAROL Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF PUDUCHERRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the eight writ petitions have been filed, challenging the Memorandum of the 2nd respondent, namely, the Director of School Education, Directorate of School Education, Puducherry and the consequential proceedings of the 4th respondent, namely, Senior Accounts Officer, Directorate of School Education, Puducherry, refusing to accord approval to the petitioners in their respective post from the date of their initial appointment, to quash the same and for further direction, directing the respondents to accord approval from the date of appointment of the petitioners, by regularizing their services with all attendant benefits.

(2.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners in all these Writ Petitions submitted that when all the petitioners were appointed in the sanctioned vacancies in the 6th respondent school, namely, Nirmala Ranee Girls Higher Secondary School, No.33, Nehru Street, Karaikkal, the respondents are not according approval from the date of their initial appointment and on the other hand, the respondents have accorded approval only from the date of the order of approval, as a result, all the petitioners are being deprived of their service benefits and salary.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that one A.Karol, the petitioner in W.P.No.20231/2008 is deprived of salary from 01.03.2007 to 02.07.2007. The action of the respondents in rejecting the approval from the date of her appointment w.e.f. 01.03.2007 citing the reason that due to financial constrains is When the 2nd respondent after approving the wholly untenable. appointment of A.Karol has released the salary from the date of approval i.e. w.e.f. 3.7.2007. It is unacceptable to plead before this Court for 4 months 2 days, they are not having sufficient financial capacity. Similarly, in the case of Siriapushpam, the petitioner in W.P.No.20232/2008, when the respondent has also granted approval of her appointment w.e.f. 09.01.2008 instead of 01.09.2007, she is also deprived of 4 months and 7 days salary and also in the case of one Rosali Mary, the petitioner in W.P.No.20233/2008, who was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher on 26.11.2003, she is deprived of one year 3 months and 8 days salary because instead of granting approval from the date of her original appointment, namely, from 26.11.2003, they have granted approval only from 03.03.2005.