IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 15TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.16179 OF 2020(V)
PETITIONER:
REEMA R.
AGED 38 YEARS
W/O.SHAJU SANKAR, 'SIVADAM', OUTER RING ROAD,
NORTH NADA, GURUVAYUR-680101.
BY ADVS.
SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH
SMT.C.K.SHERIN
RESPONDENTS:
1 GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM,
GURUVAYUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680101,
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR.
2 GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, GURUVAYUR,
THRISSUR DISTRICT-680101.
3 MANAGER,
SREEKRISHNA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, GURUVAYUR
(ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM), THRISSUR
DISTRICT-680101.
4 HEADMISTRESS,
SREEKRISHNA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, GURUVAYUR,
THRISSUR DISTRICT-680101.
R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SC FOR GURUVAYUR
DEVASWOM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 20-11-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).16927/2020(M), THE COURT ON
05-01-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 29TH KARTHIKA, 1942
WP(C).No.16927 OF 2020(M)
PETITIONERS:
1 BINDU B.KUMAR
AGED 31 YEARS
W/O. SAJI O. S., OTTUPARAKKARA HOUSE,
THONOORKKARA P O., CHELAKKARA, THRISSUR
DISTRICT - 680 586.
2 SOUMYA P.
AGED 30 YEARS
W/O. ANOOP V., KAITHAKKATT HOUSE, KOTTAPPADI,
GURUVAYUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 505.
BY ADV. SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY
RESPONDENTS:
1 GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM
GURUVAYUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680101,
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR.
2 GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, GURUVAYUR,
THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680101.
3 THE MANAGER
SREEKRISHNA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, GURUVAYUR
(ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM), THRISSUR
DISTRICT - 680101.
4 HEADMISTRESS
SREEKRISHNA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, GURUVAYUR,
THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680101.
R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-
11-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).16179/2020(V), THE COURT ON 05-
01-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020
3
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
---------------------
W.P.(C) Nos.16179 & 16927 of 2020
---------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of January, 2021
JUDGMENT
The issue, which arises for consideration in these writ petitions is with regard to the cancellation of appointment of the petitioners as UPSA in the school managed by the Guruvayur Devaswom.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners in these writ petitions, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the Guruvayur Devaswom.
3. In W.P.(C) No.16179 of 2020, the petitioner contends that she was appointed as U.P.S.A in the school by Ext.P7 appointment order dated 12.06.2020. It is submitted that a notification had been issued on 16.10.2019 inviting applications for appointment of U.P.S.A, H.S.A and Physical Education Teacher. A WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 4 selection was conducted and a ranked list was published wherein the petitioner in W.P.(C) No16179/2020 was included as Sl.No.3 while the petitioners in the other writ petition were included as Sl.Nos.4 and 5 respectively. It is stated that there were only two vacancies notified. However, by Ext.P6 letter, the 4 th respondent addressed the 3rd respondent - Manager for permission to make appointments from the existing list to the arising vacancies as well. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.16179/2020 that there was one vacancy of U.P.S.A, which arose due to a retirement on 31.03.2020 and it was against the said retirement vacancy that the petitioner was appointed by Ext.P7 order. It is submitted that when the petitioner approached the respondents for joining duty, she was told that her appointment order was cancelled. Ext.P9 is the communication issued to the petitioner. It is stated in Ext.P9 that the vacancy to which the petitioner was WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 5 appointed was not in existence and that the earlier decision of the GDMC dated 12.06.2020 had been cancelled by Ext.P10 resolution dated 15.06.2020.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.16179 of 2020 would contend that a complaint raised with regard to the appointments as also Ext.P10 resolution only covered the action of the Managing Committee and the Administrator in having sought to fill up vacancies, which had not yet arisen, from the existing ranked list. It is submitted that the allegation was only with regard to the appointments made against the vacancies of U.P.S.A, which were to arise only in future on account of promotions being effected to the post of H.S.A. It is submitted that, in the petitioner's case, the vacancy to which the petitioner was appointed was an existing vacancy of U.P.S.A and that as such, she is eligible to be appointed against the said vacancy.
5. The petitioners in W.P.(C) No.16927/2020 had WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 6 been appointed against the anticipated vacancies of U.P.S.A on account of the promotions to the post of H.S.A. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.16927/2020 that the Managing Committee had considered the request of the Headmaster and had taken a resolution to fill up the arising vacancies also from the existing ranked list. It is submitted that since the list was in force, there was absolutely no illegality in appointments being made from the list to arising and anticipated vacancies as well. It is contended that the action of the respondents in having cancelled the order of appointment, without hearing the petitioners, who had already been issued with appointment orders, is completely illegal, unjust and arbitrary. It is stated that it was only on account of the fact that a complaint had been raised that the appointment has been cancelled.
6. A counter affidavit has been placed on record WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 7 in these writ petitions by the respondents 1 to 3. It is submitted that the initial notification had been issued specifically for filling up of one vacancy of H.S.A, two vacancies of U.P.S.A and one vacancy of Physical Education Teacher in the school. It is admitted that Ext.P2 list was prepared in which six persons were included for appointment to the post of U.P.S.A. However, it is contended that since the notification was only for appointment of two persons from the said list, the list stood expired and no more appointments could have been made therefrom. It is contended that, by Ext.P3, the Committee had specifically decided that the list prepared pursuant to Ext.P1 notification would be valid for the purpose of appointments to the notified vacancies alone. It is, therefore, contended that the decision taken by Ext.P4 to make appointments from the list against arising and anticipated vacancies was completely untenable. It is submitted that the said WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 8 decision had been rendered on the basis of a request made by the Headmistress, which was apparently recommended by the Administrator and that the said decision has been cancelled by Ext.P10. It is further contended that several complaints had been received with regard to the extension of the ranked list to vacancies other than those notified and that the said malpractice had been done only to accommodate the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.16179/2020, who is the wife of a member of the Managing Committee. It is, therefore, contended that the cancellation of the orders of appointment are fully legal and valid.
7. The learned Government Pleader also supported the stand of the management and submitted that a ranked list, which was prepared for filling up the notified vacancies alone could not have been extended or operated for filling up of later vacancies as well.
8. I have considered the contentions advanced. WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 9 Ext.P1 notification produced along with W.P.(C) No.16179/2020 would show that the notification was inviting applications to the specified vacancies. There were two vacancies of U.P.S.A, which was notified. Ext.P2 list was prepared pursuant to Ext.P1 for filling up the notified vacancies alone. Ext.P3 decision was taken as early as on 31.12.2019 that the rank list would be operated for the purpose of filling up the notified vacancy alone. Therefore, with the appointment of two persons, the list stood expired. Thereafter, by Ext.P5, it appears that a decision was taken to extend the period of the list and to make appointments therefrom. Ext.P6 letter was issued by the Headmistress to the Manager seeking appointments from the list. It appears that the appointment orders were issued on the basis of the said request. However, it is clear that on 15.06.2020, the managing committee had again considered the matter. It was found that the decision taken to extend the list WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 10 was not proper and the appointments made on the basis of the extension was without considering the factual aspects of the matter. The decision to give further appointments from Ext.P2 list was, therefore, cancelled. The Administrator had specifically stated that the procedure for giving appointments from an expired list was improper. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P10 decision would also cover only those vacancies, which were not in existence as on the date when the appointment orders were issued; I am of the opinion that the very act of the respondents in having issued appointment orders from a ranked list which had already expired by extending the list was improper.
In the above view of the matter, the action taken by the respondents in having cancelled the appointments effected from a rank list, which was no longer in existence cannot be said to be illegal or unjustified. In WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 11 the result, I am of the opinion that the prayers sought for in these writ petitions cannot be granted. These writ petitions fail and the same are accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE Bng/08.12.2020 WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 12 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16179/2020 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO.R1-
8205/2019 DATED 16.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF RANK LIST NO.R1-8205/19 OF UPSA, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM SREE KRISHNA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION NO.17 DATED 31.12.2019 OF 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 14.12.2020 ADDRESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TOGETHER WITH THE NOTES OF 2ND RESPONDENT AND ADMINISTRATOR OF GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM WHICH ARE DATED 16.1.2020.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION NO.6 DATED 16.1.2020 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 3.6.2020 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.EC1-4075/2020 DATED 12.6.2020 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AND DATED 17.6.2020.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EC1-4075/2020 DATED 22.6.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION NO.1 DATED 15.6.2020 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 13 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R2(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE ONE OF THE ALLEGATIONS THAT IS SEEN UPLOADED IN THE FACEBOOK EXHIBIT R2(b) A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.2 DT 16/7/2020 PF TE 2ND RESPONDENT WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 14 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16927/2020 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION VIDE NO.R1-8205/2019 DATED 16.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST PUBLISHED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.17 DATED 31.12.2019.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.6 DATED 16.01.2020 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03.06.2020 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF APPOINTMENT VIDE NO.EC1-4075/2020 DATED 12.06.2020 ISSUED TO BOTH THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 17.06.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 18.06.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE NO.EC1-
4075/2020 DATED 18.06.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DATED 15.06.2020.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.08.2020 IN W.P.(C) 16179 OF 2020.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R2 A A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DT.14.12.2019 (MISTAKENLY NOTED AS 14.12.2020) SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT WP(C).Nos.16179 & 16927 OF 2020 15 EXHIBIT R2 B A TRUE COPY OF THE ONE OF THE ALLEGATIONS THAT IS SEEN UPLOADED IN THE FACEBOOK EXHIBIT R2 C A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO-2 DT.16.7.2020 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT