Dr. S. Sudhakaran v. Deputy Director of Collegiate Education Kollam & Ors.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 4TH KARTHIKA, 1944** ## **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** ## **PETITIONER:** DR. S. SUDHAKARAN AGED 57 YEARS S/O.K.SIVASANKARAN, AGED 57 YEARS,ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR (RETD), S.N.COLLEGE,KOLLAM, RESIDING AT 'KARTHIK', T.C.1/855,HOUSE NO.4, JAI NAGAR SOUTH,MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 011. BY ADVS. SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF SRI.M.H.ASIF ALI ## **RESPONDENTS:** 1 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION KOLLAM - 691 001. 2 DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 001. 3 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 001. BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.PARVATHY K GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** **2** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner is stated to have retired as an Associate Professor from “Sree Narayana College”, Kollam ('College' for short) – which is affiliated to the Kerala University; and assails Ext.P3 order of the Government, which rejected his claim for computation of his pensionary service taking into account his earlier services as Lecturer in “Jawaharlal Nehru College”, Kavarathi, from 06.07.1987 to 08.10.1994. 2. Sri S. Muhammed Haneef – learned counsel for the petitioner, further submitted that, when one examines Ext.P3, it is clear that three reasons are stated therein: namely, (a) that his client retired from an Aided College; (b) that his service under the Union Territory **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** **3** of Lakshadweep cannot be construed to be “Central Government Service”; and (c) finally, that Jawaharlal Nehru College is an Aided one. He argued that all the three afore objections are untenable as per the declarations in _**State**_ _**of Kerala v. P.Haridasan [2015(2) KLT 145]**_ _**(FB)**_ as also that in the subsequent Division Bench judgment of this Court in **Jayakumar.S v.** **State of Kerala** [OP(KAT) 277/2018]. He thus prayed that, the reliefs sought for in the Writ Petition be allowed. 3. Smt.Parvathy.K – learned Government Pleader on the other hand, submitted that the petitioner's claims are not tenable because, he has not been able to prove that “Jawaharlal Nehru College”, Kavarathi was not an Aided College. She then added that the claim of the petitioner is without basis also for the reason **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** **4** that “S.N.College” - from where he retired is also an Aided one. She concluded her submission saying that in any event, the services under the Union Territory of Lakshadweep - even assuming that “Jawaharlal Nehru College”, Kavarathi is owned by it – cannot be construed to be “Central Government service”. 4. The afore rival submissions of the parties being so recorded, I have examined Ext.P1 – which is the order of appointment of the petitioner in “Jawaharlal Nehru College”, Kavarathi. It begins by saying that the Administrator of the Union Territory of Lakshadweep appoints the petitioner invoking the powers conferred under Part II of the Schedule to the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) [ CCS (CCA)] Rules, 1965. **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** **5** 5. A Glance through Part II of the CCS (CCA) Rules - which takes in the Central Civil Services Group-B - all posts under the Lakshadweep Administration are treated to be on par with other Central Government Services mentioned therein. As long as there is nothing contrary to establish that the services under the Union Territory of Lakshadweep, are in any manner distinct from that under the Central Government – particularly, when it is constitutionally administered by the Central Government under the warrant of the President of India, I fail to understand how Ext.P3 concludes that petitioner is not entitled to seek his service therein be computed for his pensionary benefits. 6. That said, as far as “Jawaharlal Nehru College”, Kavarathi is concerned, the **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** **6** conclusion in Ext.P3 that it is an Aided College, is still speculative, even going by the pleadings on record, as well as the submissions of the learned Government Pleader. This is more so because, the petitioner asserts that said College is wholly owned by the Union Territory of Lakshadweep and therefore, that its services are to be reckoned only as “Central Government Service”. Therefore, a proper enquiry into this ought to have been made before conclusions were arrived at. 7. I am persuaded to the afore view also because, Ext.P3 refers to the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules, 1961, to say that the service under the Union Territories cannot be construed to be one under the Central Government. I fail to understand how this has been so stated since, even when **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** **7** one surveys the said Rules, it only provides, as far as Union Territories which have legislatures, that “ _all matters enumerated in_ _the State List and the Concurrent List in so far as any such matter concerns the Union territories except all such matters as have,_ _under these Rules, been specifically assigned_ _to any other Ministry or Department of the_ _Government of India including education, road_ _and bridges works thereon and ferries in_ _respect of Andaman and Nicobar Islands” (sic)._ 8. Next, coming to the objection that the petitioner retired from an Aided College, it is perspicuous that **Haridasan** (supra) declares the law affirmatively that _“the teachers in the Private Aided Colleges affiliated to the University of Kerala, governed by Clause (1) of Statute 5 of the First Statutes, 1976, who left the former service in Central Government on their own_ **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** **8** _violation for taking up appointment in the Private Aided Colleges affiliated to the University, are entitled to reckon their prior Central Government Service for all pensionary benefits, under Note 2 to Rule 11 of Part III K.S.R, along with their service in Private Aided Colleges, with effect from 12.11.2002, and all conditions for the grant of these benefits applicable to Government Servants as laid down in Part III of the K.S.R, as amended from time to time, shall mutatis mutandis apply to the_ ” _such teachers_ . 9. In the afore circumstances, I am left with no doubt that Ext.P3 cannot find my favour and that the matter will have to be reconsidered by the Government, taking note of the afore. Resultantly, I order this writ petition and set aside Ext.P3; with a consequential direction to the Government to reconsider the **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** **9** claim of the petitioner, adverting to my observations above, however; being left with liberty to verify whether “Jawaharlal Nehru College”, Kavarathi is an Aided College or otherwise. This shall be done after due enquiry, granting an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and of producing documents; and the resultant order shall be issued, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Indubitably, therefore, Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules appears to have little relevance in this case and what should guide our path is perhaps only the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. lsn/SAS Sd/- **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE** **WP(C) NO. 17391 OF 2018** **10** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17391/2018** PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER BEARING F.NO.18/47/90-EDN(7) DT.11.09.92 ISSUED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR OF UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DT. 15.12.2016 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO. D1/289/2017/H.EDN DTD. 31.10.2017 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE