IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2022 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 17570 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:
SALEENA KAKKATTUCHALIL,
PUTHUVEETTILKANDI HOUSE, OZHUKUR P.O,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-673642.
BY ADVS.
P.CHANDRASEKHAR
K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF
SATHEESH V.T.
MANJARI G.B.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
MALAPPURAM, PIN- 676504.
2 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
VENGARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676304.
3 THE MANAGER,
MISM UP SCHOOL, PENGATTUKUNDILPARAMBA P.O.
KANNAMANGALAM WEST, VIA AR NAGAR,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676304.
4 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF
KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
SRI SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE, SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
31.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17570 OF 2022 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner had earlier approached this Court and had preferred W.P.(C) No.26291 of 2013 and by judgment dated 22.1.2018, the writ petition was allowed and it was ordered that the petitioner is entitled to be given notional appointment in the vacancy which arose on 5.11.2007 as a Rule 51A claimant and the protected hand working in the school can be accommodated in the next arising vacancy. The educational authorities were also directed to issue appropriate orders within a period of three months.
2. The said order was challenged before this Court by the Manager and by Ext.P2 judgment dated 20.5.2020 in W.A.No.921 of 2018, their Lordships of the Division Bench after considering the entire facts and circumstances observed as follows:-
"Therefore, the finding of the learned Single Judge that the petitioner should be accommodated in the WP(C) NO. 17570 OF 2022 3 place of the protected teacher cannot be sustained. The protected teacher was appointed after getting permission from the educational authorities on 5/2/2008 and he was continuing. He is about to reach the age of superannuation. Under such circumstances, petitioner could aspire for getting an appointment only in the next arising vacancy. At the relevant time when the protected teacher was appointed, there was no situation which warranted considering of a claim under Rule 51A of Chapter XIVA KER as the petitioner was not appointed in the leave vacancy during the relevant time. That apart, the findings by the educational authorities was that she had abandoned the job on 12/9/2007.
Taking into consideration all these facts, we are of the view that the writ appeals require to be allowed and accordingly we set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge and the writ petition is disposed of as under:-
The petitioner shall be appointed as Full Time Arabic Teacher in the next arising vacancy in the school managed by the 4 th respondent. "
3. In terms of the directions issued by the Division Bench, the 2nd respondent has issued directions to the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner as a Full-time Arabic Teacher in the School from 1.6.2020. The grievance of the petitioner is that though more than a year has elapsed, no action has been taken WP(C) NO. 17570 OF 2022 4 by the 2nd respondent. In the afore circumstances, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 representation before the 1st respondent seeking to implement Ext.P3 order or in the alternative to initiate proceedings under Chapter III of Rule 7 of the KER.
4. I have heard Sri.K.K.Mohamed Ravuf, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Sunil Kumar Kuriakose, the learned Senior Government Pleader. In view of the limited nature of the relief sought for, notice to the 3rd respondent is dispensed with.
5. After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by issuing the following directions:
a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4, in the light of WP(C) NO. 17570 OF 2022 5 Exts.P2 and P3, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorised representative and the 3rd respondent.
b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent for further action.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE sru WP(C) NO. 17570 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17570/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.01.2018 IN WP(C) NO. 26291 OF 2013.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.05.2020 IN W.A NO. 921 OF 2018.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. C/3504/2021 DATED 04.03.2022 DIRECTED THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 14.05.2022 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL