Jesna Jose vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 11338 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

    THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                       WP(C).No.8957 OF 2021(T)


PETITIONER:

      1        JESNA JOSE
               AGED 38 YEARS
               W/O. POLY JOHN, NOW WORKING AS HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER
               (ENGLISH), ST. AUGUSTINE'S HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
               KALLOORKAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRIT, PIN-686 668

      2        NIMI MARIA SEBASTIAN,
               AGED 38 YEARS
               W/O. SHAJI PAUL, NOW WORKING AS HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER
               (PHYSICAL SCIENCE), ST. MARY'S HIGHER SECONDARY
               SCHOOL, ARAKUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 672

               BY ADV. SRI.PAULSON THOMAS

RESPONDENTS:

      1        STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
               GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001

      2        THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
               GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
               JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 005

      3        DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
               MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 670

      4        CORPORATE MANAGER,
               CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY,
               DIOCESE OF KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN-686691

               SMT.NISHA BOSE, GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.8957 OF 2021

                                          2



                                  JUDGMENT

Dated this the 8th day of April 2021

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

"i) issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext-P2 and P3 rejection orders in respect of the 1st petitioner and P6, P7 and P8 orders in respect of the 2nd petitioner.

ii) issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ or direction directing the DEO Muvattupuzha to grant approval to the petitioners appointment as HST (English) and HST (Physical Science) w.e.f. 01-06-2017 as per P1 and P5 respectively, and further direct to grant all consequential monitory benefits.

iii) or in the alternative issue appropriate direction directing the 1st respondent Government to consider and pass orders on P4 revision petition filed by the Manager in respect of the 1 st petitioner and P9 revision petition filed by the 2 nd petitioner, after hearing the petitioners and the Manager.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the

petitioners were appointed as UP School Teachers under the 4 th

respondent management. They were promoted as High School

Teachers with effect from 01.06.2017. However, approval was rejected

stating that earlier appointees under the management had not been

granted approval. Against the rejection of the approval to the 1 st WP(C).No.8957 OF 2021

petitioner's appointment, the Manager has preferred Ext.P4 revision

petition, while the 2nd petitioner has preferred Ext.P9 revision petition

with regard to the rejection of approval to her appointment.

4. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, I am of the

opinion that Exts.P4 and P9 revision petitions are liable to be

considered in accordance with law. There will, accordingly, be a

direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on

Exts.P4 and P9 revision petitions preferred by the petitioners, with

notice to the petitioners as well as the Manager and after hearing

them, through any appropriate means, including by video

conferencing, within a period of three months from the date of receipt

of a copy of this judgment. If the petitioners' appointments are found

liable to be approved, the monetary benefits due shall be released to

the petitioners within a period of three months thereafter.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE NP WP(C).No.8957 OF 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 1ST PETITIONER AS HST (ENGLISH) DATED 01.06.2017.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER ISEUD BY THE DEO NO. BI/4819/2017/K. DIS. DATED 28.09.2017 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DPI NO.

DGE/7554/2019-EC3 DATED 11.12.2019 REJECTING THE REVISION PETITION.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE MANAGER AGAINST P3 BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DATED 28.12.2019.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER THE 2ND PETITIONER AS HSA (PHYSICAL SCIENCE), DATED 01.06.2017.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. BI/4777/2017/K.

DIS. DATED 06.10.2017 OF THE DEO REJECTING APPROVAL TO P5.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR NO. B4/26548/17/DDE/K. DIS. DATED 29.09.2018 REJECTING APPEAL IN RESPECT OF 2ND PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DGE NO.

DGE/2704/2020-EC3 DATED 08.09.2020 REJECTING PETITION IN RESPECT OF 2ND PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DATED 01.03.2201 AGAINST P8 REJECTION.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO. 258/1990/G.EDN.

DATED 15.12.1990.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL