Back
2017 Supreme(Online)(KER) 34232
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.V.ASHA, J
M S SARITHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 31772/2017
Appointments against regular vacancies are entitled to approval on a regular basis, reinforcing employment rights within educational institutions.
Headnote:
Approval - Appointment - Education Act - Sections 1, 2 - The court emphasized that appointments made against regular vacancies must be approved on a regular basis, aligning with precedents on educational employment entitlements.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought approval for a regular scale of pay from the date of her appointment as HSA (Hindi), which was initially granted on a daily wage basis. The approval was denied despite her request and comparison with another teacher's appointment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's appointment fell within the established precedent that approvals for appointments against regular vacancies should be granted, regardless of intervening vacations, thus ruling in her favor.
Issues: Whether the denial of approval for regular pay from the date of initial appointment was justified given the precedence established by previous court decisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that appointments made against existing regular vacancies should be recognized and approved on a regular basis, supporting the entitlement of the petitioner in this context.
Final Decision: The court directed the approval of the petitioner's appointment on regular pay from the date of her initial appointment.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner who was appointed as HSA (Hindi) in the
5th respondent school is aggrieved by the denial of approval to her on regular scale of pay with effect from the date of initial appointment.
2. The petitioner's appointment as per Ext. P1 order as HSA (Hindi) was against the vacancy which arose on retirement of the then incumbent on 31.03.2010. Petitioner was appointed with effect from 29.07.2010. The appointment was approved as per the endorsement in Ext. P1 on 07.02.2012 approving the appointment on daily wages for the first academic year and on regular scale of pay from the ex academic year onwards i.e. with effect from 01.06.2011. Even though the petitioner as well as the manager had approached the educational authorities requesting for approval on regular basis with effect from the initial date of appointment, no positive action was taken. Petitioner points out that as per Ext. P7 order issued on 30.06.2015, the District Educational Officer had issued orders granting approval to another teacher, who was appointed from 31.07.2006 onwards on regular basis.
3. The issue regarding the approval of appointment after the commencement of the academic year against regular vacancies is already considered by the apex court in the judgment in State f Kerala v. Sneha Cheriyan [2013 (1) KLT 755], which was explained by this Court in Nair Service Society v. State of Kerala [2013 (4) KLT 921] wherein it is held that such appointments made against regular vacancies are liable to be approved on regular basis notwithstanding the intervening vacation.
In the above circumstances, petitioner's appointment is liable to be approved on regular basis with effect from 29.07.2010 itself. Accordingly there shall be a direction to the 4th respondent to issue revised orders approving the appointment of the petitioner on regular scale of pay with effect from 29.07.2010 and to grant her all consequential benefits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
