Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1810 (KER)

P. Nabeesa v. State of Kerala

2025-07-03

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.

body2025
JUDGMENT : Anil K. Narendran, J. These writ appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 29.02.2024 of a learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)Nos.19398 of 2014, 17057 of 2016 and 21733 of 2014. By the said judgment, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petitions, along with connected matter, i.e., W.P.(C)No.8762 of 2013, following the order dated 02.11.2023 of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.9884 of 2013 and connected matters - State of Kerala & others v. K.Bhanamma . Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the appellants are before this Court in these writ appeals, invoking provisions under Section 5 (i) of the Kerala High Court Act , 1958. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant in the respective writ appeals and also the learned Senior Government Pleader for the State and official respondents. 3. The writ petitions of the year 2014 and 2016 were kept pending, in view of the order dated 29.10.2013 of the Apex Court in SLP(C)No.34523 of 2013, arising out of the judgment of this Court dated 29.05.2013 in W.A.No.560 of 2013 and connected matters. A copy of the order dated 29.10.2013 of the Apex Court in SLP(C)No.34523 of 2013, a copy of which is marked as Annexure A1 in R.P.No.567 of 2023 in W.P.(C)No.19398 of 2014 reads thus; “Delay condoned. Leave granted. Issue notice on the appellants’ prayer for interim relief, returnable in eight weeks. Dasti, in addition, is permitted. In the meanwhile, the operation of the impugned orders as also the orders passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court shall remain stayed. It shall be the appellants’ duty to serve the respondents before the next date of hearing failing which the interim order passed today shall stand automatically vacated. Since large number of similar matters are likely to crop up in future, we request the High Court to defer adjudication of all such matters till the decision of the appeals by this Court. The Registry is directed to sent a copy of this order to the Registrar General of the Kerala High Court by fax who shall place the same before Hon’ble the Chief Justice for appropriate directions.” 4. The Registry is directed to sent a copy of this order to the Registrar General of the Kerala High Court by fax who shall place the same before Hon’ble the Chief Justice for appropriate directions.” 4. It is thereafter that Civil Appeal No.9884 of 2013 arising out of the judgment dated 29.05.2013 in W.A.No.560 of 2013 of the Division bench of this Court and connected matter were disposed of by the order of the Apex Court dated 02.11.2023 in State of Kerala & others v. K.Bhanamma. The said order reads thus; “Leave is granted in SLP (C) No.33132 of 2015. Challenging the order dated 29.05.2013 passed in Writ Appeal No.560 of 2013 arising out of order passed in Writ Petition (C) No.19075 of 2012, Civil Appeal No. 9884 Of 2013 has been filed. Challenging the order dated 08.04.2013 in Writ Appeal No.539 of 2013 arising out of order passed in Writ Petition (C) No.30328 of 2008, Civil Appeal No. 9885 of 2013 has been filed and against the order dated 24.03.2015 in Writ Appeal No.1980 of 2014 arising out of order passed in Writ Petition (C) No.11846 of 2012 by the High Court of Kerala, Civil Appeal No. 7439 of 2023 [@ SLP (C) No.33132 of 2015] has been preferred. After hearing learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant(s) and learned counsel appearing for the respondent(s), we are not inclined to entertain these appeals. During hearing, we have perused the Notification issued on 11.10.2012, which is reproduced as under :- Order Government are pleased to order that the first sentence of Note below Rules 5(2). Annexure 2 of the Government Order read above, regarding service weightage is modified as follows: "Service for the purpose of this rule means full time regular service (where protection of pay is allowed) including broken periods of service qualifying for normal increments in the scales of pay". However, already settled court cases will not be re-opened. In view of the Notification, the cases of post- amendment shall be considered and decided as per the said Notification and the impugned Judgment would not be applied as a precedent in those cases. In view of the forgoing observations, these appeals stand disposed of. All questions of law are left open. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.” 5. In view of the forgoing observations, these appeals stand disposed of. All questions of law are left open. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.” 5. By the impugned judgment dated 29.02.2024, the learned Single judge disposed of the writ petitions in view of the order of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.9884 of 2013 and connected matters with certain directions. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the judgment dated 29.02.2024 read thus; “3. In the light of the above order, the petitioners are entitled the benefit as directed by the Apex Court in the above order. The authority will consider whether the notification dated 11.10.2012 extracted in the Supreme Court order is applicable to the petitioners based on the date of fixation of pay. The 1 st respondent will consider the case of the petitioners in the light of the above contention, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. 4. If any of the petitioners are having any other surviving grievance, they are free to submit a representation before the Government and the Government will consider the same also, while deciding the matter as directed above. Recovery proceedings, if any initiated against the petitioners shall be kept in abeyance till final orders are passed in these cases. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of.” 6. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant in W.A.No.493 of 2024 and also the learned counsel for the appellants in W.A.Nos.674 and 675 of 2024 would point out that the judgment dated 07.03.2012 of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.428 of 2012, a copy of which is marked as Ext.P7 in W.P.(C)No.19398 of 2014, was not taken in appeal before the Apex Court, though the subsequent judgments rendered by the Division Bench following the judgment in W.A.No.428 of 2012, were taken up in appeal before the Apex Court. 7. The submission of the learned Senior Government Pleader is that Ext.P7 judgment was also brought to the notice of the Apex Court in the SLPs filed by the State. 8. 7. The submission of the learned Senior Government Pleader is that Ext.P7 judgment was also brought to the notice of the Apex Court in the SLPs filed by the State. 8. We do not propose to consider the rival contentions on the above aspect in these proceedings, since the Civil Appeals have already been disposed of by the Apex Court vide order dated 02.11.2023 - State of Kerala & others v. K.Bhanamma. 9. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition in terms of the order dated 02.11.2023 of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.9884 of 2013 and connected matters, with the directions contained in paragraph 4 of the said judgment, and it was ordered that the recovery proceedings against the appellants-petitioners shall be kept in abeyance till final orders are passed by the 1 st respondent State. In such circumstances, we find no merit in these writ appeals and they are accordingly dismissed.