SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(Ker) 279

Judges : T.CHANDRASEKHARA MENON
ANITHA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA - Respondent
Case No : O. P. No. 3305, 2719 of 1977
Decided On : 12/08/1977
Advocates Appeared :
Siby Mathew; For Petitioner O. V. Radhakrishnan; For Petitioner Government Pleader; For Respondents

The termination of the petitioners' services based on the circular was declared void and of no effect in law, entitling them to continue in service and receive all consequential benefits like salary.

Headnote:

Illegal Termination - Kerala Last Grade Service - The court declared the termination of the petitioners' services based on the circular as void and of no effect in law, entitling them to continue in service and receive all consequential benefits like salary.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, members of the Kerala Last Grade Service, were provisionally appointed as Attenders in Government Home Dispensary. They were relieved from service based on a circular by the Director of Homeopathy, which the petitioners argued was illegal and violative of the relevant statutory rules concerning their service.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners' appointments could only have been in accordance with R.6 of the Special Rules, and therefore they cannot be relieved merely on the completion of three months of service. The court declared the termination of the petitioners' services based on the circular as void and of no effect in law, entitling them to continue in service and receive all consequential benefits like salary.

Issues: The issue was whether the circular by the Director of Homeopathy, which led to the termination of the petitioners' services, was legal and in compliance with the relevant statutory rules concerning their service.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the relevant statutory rules and found that the petitioners' appointments could only have been in accordance with R.6 of the Special Rules, and therefore they cannot be relieved merely on the completion of three months of service.

Final Decision: The court declared the termination of the petitioners' services based on the circular as void and of no effect in law, entitling them to continue in service and receive all consequential benefits like salary.

Judgment :-

1. The petitioners are members of the Kerala Last Grade Service, appointed as candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange. They were provisionally appointed as Attenders in Government Home Dispensary, Arakuzh and Manjapra respectively. Their complaint in the original petitions is that the directions given by the Director of Homeopathy in his circular Ex. P4, by which provisional hands except nurses who have completed 3 months service should be relieved outright without waiting for substitutes is clearly illegal and violative of the relevant statutory rules concerning their service. The circular Ext. P4 dated 217 1977 reads:

"In the light of government letter No. 21664/Spl 2/77 HD dt.11-5-77 Attenders/ Attendants/Nursing Assistants are not para-medical staff and hence provisional hands belonging to the said category cannot be permitted to continue in service beyond 3 months. Hence all provisional hands, except nurses who have completed 3 months service should be relieved out right without waiting for substitutes and report compliance to this office. The Nurses are treated as para medical staff and hence provisional Nurses can be allowed to continue is service beyond 3 months subject to a maximum period of 12 months A list of those provisional hands who are continuing in service in the light of writ petitions and stay orders has already been sent to all Chief Medical Officers and Professor-Cum-Superintendent. These provisional hands may be permitted to continue in service until further orders from this office."

It would appear that both the petitioners have now been relieved from service consequent on that circular.

What is contended before me is that the petitioners are members of the Kerala Last Grade Service and they will come within category 2 in R.1 of the Special Rules regarding Kerala Last Grade Service. R.1 relates to the constitution of the service and states that the service shall consist of the categories specified therein. 2nd category consists of "Duffadar, Mochee, gazman, Guard, Helmsman, Dispensary attendant, field workers, Ayah. Court-keeper, Dresser, Head keeper, Filed Assistant, Turn Cock (Keeper) and last grade attenders."

2. Admittedly the petitioners are Dispensary Attendants and will come within category 2. In regard to temporary appointments to the service, the provision is contained in R.6 of the Rules. R.6 states:

"(a) Where in any office other than the Governor's Secretariat it is necessary in the public interest owing to an emergency which has arisen to fill immediately a vacancy in a post borne on the cadre of any category of the service and there would be undue delay in making such appointment in accordance with these rules, the appointing authority may appoint a person, otherwise than in accordance with these rules, temporarily until a person is appointed in accordance with these rules.

(b) A person appointed under sub-rule (a) shall be replaced as soon as possible by a member of the service or a candidate qualified to hold the post under these rules. Such person shall not be regarded as a probationer in the service or be entitled by reason only of such appointment to any preferential claim to future appointment to the service. If such person is subsequently appointed in accordance with these rules, he shall commence bis probation therein from the date of such subsequent appointment or from such earlier date as may be determined by the appointing authority without prejudice to the seniority of others. He shall also be eligible to draw increments in the time-scale of pay applicable to him from the date of commencement of his probation but shall not entitled to arrears of pay unless otherwise ordered by the government.".

Rule 3 of the Rules is to the effect that,

"Part II of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules other than R.3,4, 10C, 14,15,16 and 17 shall not apply to the service."

Therefore, R.9 of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules will not be applicable in the case 2n




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top