LISSIMOL M. v. STATE OF KERALA & OTHERS; LISSYAMMA ABRAHAM v. STATE OF KERALA & OTHERS (WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 of 2019)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.9293 OF 2019(J)** ## **PETITIONER:** **LISSIMOLE M., AGED 52 YEARS, W/O.VINCENT A.J., HSST (HINDI) LEO XIIITH HSS, ALAPPUZHA, RESIDING AT 'ARASSAR KADAVIL', MARARIKKULAM NORTH P.O., ALAPPUZHA.** **BY ADVS. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.V.VENUGOPAL** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2 THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, SHANTI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.** **3 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, CHENGANNUR - 689 121.** **4 THE CORPORATE MANAGER, CORPORATE MANAGEMENT OF SCHOOLS, DIOCESE OF ALLEPPEY, P.B.NO.404, ALAPPUZHA - 688 001.** **BY ADV.SRI.P.M.MANOJ, SR.GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.02.2021 ALONG WITH W.P.(C)NO.9399 OF 2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** **-2-** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.9399 OF 2019(Y)** ## **PETITIONER:** **LISSYAMMA ABRAHAM, AGED 53 YEARS, W/O.JOSELINE.K.A., HSST (MALAYALAM), ST. JOSEPH'S HSS FOR GIRLS, ALAPPUZHA, RESIDING AT KOILPARAMBIL, P.O.ARTHUNGAL, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.V.VENUGOPAL** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.** - **2 THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, SHANTI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.** - **3 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, CHENGANNUR-689121.** - **4 CANOSSIAN CORPORATE MANAGEMENT OF SCHOOLS, ST.JOSEPH'S CANOSSIAN CONVENT, ALAPPUZHA688001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CORPORATE MANAGER.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.P.M.MANOJ, SR.GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.02.2021 ALONG WITH W.P.(C)NO.9293 OF 2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** **-3-** ## **JUDGMENT** **Dated this the 24th day of February 2021** These two writ petitions contain same set of factual circumstances and seek similar prayers; I, therefore, deem it appropriate that they be heard together and disposed of through this judgment. 2. The petitioner in W.P.(C)No.9293 of 2019, Smt.Lissimol, was appointed as a Higher Secondary School Teacher (Junior) [HSST(Jr)], in the services of 'Leo XIIIth HSS', Alappuzha, and she says that this post of HSST(Jr) was upgraded as an Higher Secondary School Teacher (HSST) in the said School with effect from the academic year 2006-07, as is evident from Ext.P4 therein. 3. The petitioner says that, therefore, since she had been working as HSST (Jr) from the year 2002, she was entitled to be upgraded to the post of HSST and granted approval with effect from the academic year 2006-07. She alleges that, however, ## **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** **-4-** through Ext.P5 order, the third respondent – Regional Deputy Director, Chengannur, granted approval to her only with effect from 15.07.2013 in the post of HSST, saying that said post was created only with effect from that day, as is clear from Ext.P6. 4. The petitioner says that even though Government issued formal orders only on 15.07.2013 sanctioning upgradation of the post, as is manifest from Ext.P4, said upgradation has retrospective effect from the academic year 2006-07. The petitioner, therefore, prays that she be directed to be granted approval with effect from the academic year 2006-07 and that Ext.P6 be set aside to such extent. 5. While so, W.P.(C)No.9399 of 2019 has been filed by Smt.Lissyamma Abraham, citing identical factual circumstances as afore, except that she was appointed as a HSST (Jr) in Malayalam in the ## **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** **-5-** year 2006 in the services of 'St.Josph's HSS for Girls', Alappuzha. 6. She says that, as is unmistakable from Ext.P5 in this writ petition, the post of HSST(Jr) was upgraded as HSST with effect from the academic year 2008-09, but that the Regional Deputy Director (RDD), Chengannur, has granted approval to her in the said post only with effect from 15.07.2013, for the same reason, as has been stated afore. The petitioner also, therefore, prays that Ext.P6 be set aside to the extent to which her approval has been denied from the academic year 2008-09. 7. In response to the afore submissions made on behalf of the petitioners by their learned counsel – Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned Senior Government Pleader – Sri.P.M.Manoj, submitted that since Government had sanctioned the post subsequent to its upgradation only with effect ## **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** **-6-** from 15.07.2013, they become eligible to seek approval in the said post from that date alone. The learned Senior Government Pleader concluded his submission by saying that it was a policy decision of the Government to sanction the post only with effect from 15.07.2013; and therefore, that they were also entitled to order that approval to the teachers would also be granted from that day. He asserted that therefore, these writ petitions are devoid of merit and prayed that same be dismissed. 8. When I evaluate the afore rival submissions, it is rendered without doubt that even though the posts were formally sanctioned by the Government only on 15.07.2013, same was given retrospective effect from the academic years 200607 and 2008-09 as far as the petitioners are concerned. 9. Obviously, therefore, since the ## **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** **-7-** petitioners were continuing in the services much before the date on which the posts were upgraded, they were certainly entitled to seek approval from the date on which the posts were so upgraded and not merely from the date on which Government had formally sanctioned such upgradation. This is because, the Government Order, which formally sanctioned upgradation of the post, is only one which is consequential to the earlier proceedings upgrading the post from HSST (Jr) to HSST retrospectively from the aforementioned academic years. 10. That said, I am aware that I do not require to speak in greater detail in this regard, because several judgments have already been delivered on this aspect, including, **State of Kerala and Another v. Saji T.M. and Another** [2009 (3) KLT 766], **State of Kerala and Others v.** **K.V.Sreejith** [2019(2)KLT 253] and in **State of** ## **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** **-8-** **Kerala v** . **Cyriac Stephen (W.A.No.1612 of 2018),** whereby, this Court has declared that what is relevant for the purpose of approval is not the date on which the vacancies are formally sanctioned by the Government, but the date from which these vacancies are given effect to. 11. In the case at hand, there can be no doubt that the posts in question were upgraded retrospectively, though they were formally created by the Government only on 15.07.2013. 12. Obviously, therefore, approval of the petitioners must also relate back to the date on which the posts were upgraded and not the date on which they were formally created by the Government. In the afore circumstances, I order these writ petitions and set aside Ext.P5 in W.P. (C)No.9293/2019 and Ext.P6 in W.P.(C)No.9399/2019, to the extent to which it denies approval to the **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** **-9-** petitioners from the academic years 2006-07 and 2008-09 respectively, but only with effect from 15.07.2013. Consequently, the competent Regional Deputy Director will issue fresh orders granting the afore benefit to the petitioners, as expeditiously as is possible but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; and the resultant benefits will also be disbursed to them within a further period of two months thereafter. **Sd/DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE** ## **akv/RP** **-10-** ## **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** ## **APPENDIX IN WP(C)No.9293/2019** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER APPROVING THE PETITIONER AS HSST (JUNIOR) HINDI.** **EXHIBIT P2** **TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE CORPORATE MANAGER/THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR.** **EXHIBIT P3** **TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER DATED 13/06/2014 ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF SCHOOLS IN WHICH SCHOOL ADDITIONAL POST CREATION TO BE PROPOSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02/02/2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF G.O. (MS) NO.211/2013/G.EDN. DATED 15/07/2013.** **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.** //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ## **WP(C).Nos.9293 & 9399 OF 2019** **-11-** ## **APPENDIX IN WP(C)No.9399/2019** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE CORPORATE MANAGER DATED 20.8.2009.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR IN MARCH 2014.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 23.1.2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. (MS)NO.202/2015/G.EDN. DATED 28.7.2015.** **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.** //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE