Kerala High Court
Chitra.S vs State Of Kerala on 9 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 20TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.37726 OF 2018(M)
PETITIONER:
CHITRA.S
AGED 49 YEARS
HSST(MATHEMATICS),
PADANILAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
NOORANADU,
ALAPPUZHA
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001
2 THE DIRECTOR
HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
O/O THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
EDUCATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR
HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
O/O DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
CHENGANNUR-689121.
4 MANAGER,
PADANILAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
NOORANADU,ALAPPUZHA-690504.
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
1438/2019 2
5 ANI THOMAS,
HSST(PHYSICS),PADANILAM HIGHER SECONDARY
SCHOOL,NOORANADU,ALAPPUZHA-690504.
BY ADVS.
R5 SRI.M.R.ANISON
R5 SMT.V.BHARGAVI (PANANGAD)
R5 SMT.A.MEENAKSHI
R5 SMT.P.A.RINUSA
SRI.P.M. MANOJ, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 09.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).1438/2019(D), THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
1438/2019 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 20TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.1438 OF 2019(D)
PETITIONER:
ANI THOMAS
AGED 56 YEARS
W/O. BIJU M. SAMUEL, PRINCIPAL -IN- CHARGE,
PADANILAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PADANILAM
P.O, NOORANADU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.R.ANISON
SMT.V.BHARGAVI (PANANGAD)
SMT.P.A.RINUSA
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
2 THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION.
HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
3 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER
SECONDARY EDUCATION,OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
CHENGANNUR-689 121
4 CHITRA S.
HSST(MATHEMATICS), PADANILAM HIGHER SECONDARY
SCHOOL, PADANILAM P.O, NOORANADU, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT, PIN-690 529
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
1438/2019 4
5 INDULAKSHMI R.
HSST (CHEMISTRY), PADANILAM HIGHER SECONDARY
SCHOOL, PADANILAM P.O, NOORANADU, ALAPPUZHA-
690 529
6 THE MANAGER
PADANILAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PADANILAM
P.O, NOORANAD, ALAPPUZHA-690 529
BY ADVS.
R4 SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
R5 SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD
R5 SMT.M.N.ANITHA
SRI.P.M. MANOJ, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 09.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).37726/2018(M), THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
1438/2019 5
JUDGMENT
I am considering these two writ petitions jointly since
the factual circumstances pleaded are inter-layered and the
reliefs sought for in one will depend upon the reliefs sought
for in the other.
2. Both these writ petitions are filed by Higher
Secondary School Teachers (HSST) working in "Padanilam
Higher Secondary School, Nooranadu, Alappuzha"- of which
the 4th respondent is the Manager.
3. W.P.(C).No.37726/2018 has been filed by
Smt.Chitra, who claims to have been appointed to the post of
HSST on 04.09.2000; while W.P.(C).No.1438/2019 has been
filed by Smt.Ani Thomas, who asserts that she was promoted
as HSST while working as a High School Teacher, on
11.10.2000.
4. The dispute between these two teachers is as to
who should be reckoned to be Senior, so as to be appointed
as the Principal of the school.
5. Sri.M.R.Anison, learned counsel appearing for
Smt.Ani Thomas, contend that since appointments to the post
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
of HSST in the school had been done under the provisions of
Chapter XXXII, Rule 4 of the Kerala Education Rules (KER),
his client ought to have been appointed prior to Smt.Chitra,
since the ratio applicable is 1:3 between by transfer
appointees and direct recruitees. Sri.M.R.Anison submitted
that Smt.Chitra, admittedly being a direct recruitee, could
have only been appointed after the by-transfer appointment
had been completed; and therefore, that his client has been
constrained to approach this Court by filing W.P.
(C).No.1438/2019 seeking that the 6th respondent Manager
be directed to promote her as HSST with effect from
14.08.2000, with a consequential direction to the 2 nd
respondent to approve her appointment from that date.
6. Sri. M.R.Anison asserts that it is only because his
client had been promoted on a date subsequent to the
appointment of Smt.Chitra, that the controversy has arisen;
and that, going by the afore mentioned provisions of the KER,
the by-transfer appointees ought to have been shown as
senior to the direct recruitees, which has been correctly done
in Ext.P2 seniority list as on 30.03.2013.
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
7. Sri.M.R.Anison further submits that, however,
though there were no disputes with respect to the seniority
list, the Manager unilaterally revised the same and issued
Exts.P6 and P7 seniority lists, wherein, his client has been
shown to be junior to Smt.Chitra. He says that his client has,
therefore, preferred Ext.P8 statutory Revision before the first
respondent─Government of Kerala and additionally prays that
same be directed to be taken up and disposed of at the
earliest.
8. Sri.M.R.Anison then submitted that, in the
meanwhile, since the school was functioning without a full
time Principal, the Manager appointed Smt.Ani Thomas,
through proceedings dated 04.04.2013, as the Principal-in-
charge and that this has been approved through Ext.P3
proceedings of the Regional Deputy Director of Higher
Secondary Education, Chengannur. Sri.M.R.Anison, therefore,
prayed that the Manger be directed to appoint his client as
the Principal with effect from 14.08.2000, being the date on
which Smt.Chitra was appointed as Principal─in-charge and
that the first respondent−State of Kerala be directed to
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
dispose of Ext.P8 within a time frame fixed by this Court.
9. In response, Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel
appearing for Smt.Chitra-the petitioner in W.P.(C)
No.37726/2018, submitted that the attempt of Smt.Ani
Thomas, by filing the other writ petition, is to upset the
seniority, which has already been settled by the Manager
more than seven years ago. He submitted that Smt.Ani
Thomas has never objected to her appointment being only
with effect from 11.10.2000 and that what she is now trying
to do is to obtain a retrospective appointment with effect from
14.08.2000 and to thus unsettle the seniority list, which has
already been validly approved. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan submitted
that, contrary to the submissions of Sri.M.R.Anison as
recorded above, his client had objected to the seniority list
drawn in the year 2013 (the copy of which is Ext.P2 in
W.P.(C) No.1438/2019) and it is, therefore, that the Manager
had revised the same in the year 2018, correctly showing his
client as being senior to Smt.Chitra.
10. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, thereafter, submitted that since
the school was continuing without a Principal from the year
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
2013, when the vacancy arose, his client had approached the
competent Educational Authorities seeking a direction to the
Manager to appoint a full time Principal and that this
culminated in Ext.P3 proceedings dated 06.11.2017‒
produced along with W.P.(C) No.37726/2018 ─ of the Regional
Deputy Director of Higher Secondary Education, Chengannur,
directing the Manager to appoint a full time Principal, based
on the seniority list available in the school.
11. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel, added that
inspite of Ext.P3, no action has been taken by the Manager to
appoint a full time Principal and that he is thus
illegally allowing Smt.Ani Thomas to continue as the
Principal-in-charge. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, therefore, prays that
his client be directed to be appointed as the Principal of the
school forthwith and that the same be directed to be
approved with effect from 01.04.2013, being the date on
which the vacancy arose.
12. The learned Senior Government Pleader
Sri.P.M.Manoj, submitted that Government is willing to
consider the statutory Revision preferred by Smt.Ani Thomas
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
namely Ext.P8 in W.P.(C) No.1438/2019, but that it has no
role in relation to appointment of the Principal in the school,
which has to be done by the 6 th respondent ─ Manager. He
also affirmed that the Regional Deputy Director has already
directed the Manager to make sure that the School has a full
time Principal and not to function with a Principal-in-charge
any more; and therefore, that the Manager is bound to abide
by such directions in Ext.P3, produced along with W.P.(C)
No.37726/2018.
13. When I consider the afore submissions and
evaluate the materials and documents available on record, it
becomes inevitable that the school is now continuing with a
Principal‒in-charge for the last seven years. This is certainly
deleterious to the functioning of the school and in particular
to the students and to the staff. It is presumably, because of
this and based on the complaint of Smt.Chitra, that the
Regional Deputy Director has issued Ext.P3 produced in
W.P.(C).No.37726/2018, directing the Manager to appoint a
full time Principal and not to continue the post of
Principal‒in-charge indefinitely. However, no action appears to
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
be taken by the Manager until now and he is keeping silent on
the rival contentions of the parties, leading to the post of
Principal being kept unfilled even now.
14. I am certain that conduct of the Manager cannot be
approved because going by the latest seniority list available,
Smt.Chitra has been shown as senior to Smt.Ani Thomas,
though the latter has certainly objected to the same by filing
a statutory Revision before Government. However, no action
has been taken by the Government on this statutory Revision
filed by Smt.Ani Thomas and I am, therefore, of the view that
it becomes, incumbent upon this Court to now issue urgent
orders so that the school is not allowed to continue with a
Principal in charge ad infinitum.
15. In the afore circumstances, I order these writ
petitions, directing the Manager of the school to immediately
consider the rival claims of Smt.Chitra and Smt.Ani Thomas
for appointment to the post of Principal and to issue
appropriate orders, after affording them an opportunity of
being heard; and consequently appoint the most suitable
among them as per law as the principal of the School, which
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
shall be done not later than one month from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
16. In order to facilitate an expeditious action as
directed above, I direct both Smt.Chitra and Smt.Ani Thomas
to mark appearance before the Manager at 11.a.m on
16.02.2021, on which day, he shall hear them or fix another
convenient date for hearing, and issue a final order as
directed above within the time frame above fixed. It is further
clarified that the Manager shall act as directed above without
waiting for the Government to decide the Revision filed before
it by Smt.Ani Thomas.
17. As far as Smt.Ani Thomas is concerned, certainly
she is entitled to have her statutory Revision considered by
the Government and I, therefore, direct the Government to
take up Ext.P8, produced along with W.P.(C) No.1438/2019
and dispose the same after affording an opportunity of being
heard to her, Smt.Chitra as well as the Manager of the
school ‒either physically or through video conferencing ‒ thus
culminating in an appropriate order thereon, as expeditiously
as possible, but not later than three months from the date of
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Needless to say, since I have not considered any of the
rival contentions of the parties on its merits, I leave all of
them open to be pursued appropriately before the Manager as
well as the Government, resultant to the directions above.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
LEK
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37726/2018
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF HIGHER
SECONDARY EDUCATION.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
13/07/2017
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
06/11/2017 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT-R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) NO.
162/98/G.EDN, DATED 13/05/1998
EXHIBIT-R5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR BEARING NO.
Acd.A1/2179/99/HSE DATED 23/12/1999
EXHIBIT-R5(C) TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS)
298/2000/G.EDN, DATED 25/08/200
WP(C).No.37726/2018 &
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1438/2019
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER BEARING ACD.
C3/18605/HSE/2001, DATED 02.07.2002
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF SENIORITY LIST AS ON
30.03.2013 OF 6TH RESPONDENT SCHOOL.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER BEARING NO.
TRO/7/4701/13/HSE, DATED 17.05.2013
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 03.07.2017 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE
6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED
09.05.2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
SENIORITY LIST AS ON 01.06.2017
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
SENIORITY LIST AS ON 01.06.2018
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 15.11.2018 BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:NIL
