Gowri.S vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 5035 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

        THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 22ND MAGHA,1942

                        WP(C).No.2550 OF 2020(P)


PETITIONER:

                GOWRI.S.,
                AGED 17, MINOR,
                REPRESENTED THROUGH HER FATHER AND
                NATURAL GUARDIAN SAJEEV T,
                AGED 48 YEARS,
                S/O. THANKAPPAN,
                GOWRI NANDANAM, ERAM MIDDLE,
                CHATHANNOOR P.O.,
                KOLLAM DISTRICT- 691 572.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.P.YADHU KUMAR
                SMT.R.S.ASWINI SANKAR

RESPONDENTS:

         1      STATE OF KERALA,
                REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY,
                SECRETARIAT,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN - 695 001.

         2      TAHSILDAR,
                TALUK OFFICE,
                KOLLAM,
                PIN - 691 001

         3      REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
                TALUK OFFICE,
                KOLLAM PIN - 691 001.

         4      THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY (NEET),
                CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION,
                SHIKSH KENDRA, 2, COMMUNITY CENTRE,
                PREET VIHAR,
                DELHI PIN - 110 098

ADDL.    5      THE DIRECTOR, NTA,
                C-20, IA/8, SECTOR 62,
                IITK OUTREACH CENTER,
                NOIDA - 201 309
 WP(C).No.2550/2020(P)

                               2

             THE ADDITIONAL 5TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER
             THE ORDER DATED 30-01-2020 IN I.A. 04/2020 IN
             W.P.(C)

ADDL.   6    THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
             KOLLAM DISTRICT,
             PIN - 691 013

             THE ADDITIONAL 6TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER
             THE ORDER DATED 20-08-2020 IN I.A.07/2020 IN W.P.C)

             R4 & 5 BY ADV. SRI.NIRMAL S, SC
             R1-3,ADDL.R6 GOVERNMENT PLEADER
             SMT. DEEPA NARAYANAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
11.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.2550/2020(P)

                                  3




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 11th day of February, 2021

The petitioner is seeking a direction to grant her a

Non-Creamy Layer Certificate.

2. The petitioner filed an application before the 2 nd

respondent for issuing a Non-creamy layer certificate. The

2nd respondent however rejected the application on the

ground that both the parents of the petitioner belong to Class

II category of employees. According to the petitioner,

petitioner's mother is an aided school teacher and therefore

cannot be treated as Class II.

3. The respondents filed a counter statement. The

respondents contended that after considering the application

of the petitioner, it was noticed that father and mother of the

petitioner have entered in the Government service as Class II

Officers. According to the respondents, in view of the WP(C).No.2550/2020(P)

Government Order dated 26.09.2009, if both the parents of

the petitioner have entered Government services as Class II

Officers, their children will not be eligible for non-creamy

layer certificate. It is under such circumstances that the

certificate has been declined to the petitioner.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

Ext.P8 G.O(P)No.81/09/SCSTDD dated 26.09.2009

prescribes the criteria for grant of non-creamy layer

certificate. Annexure-D Schedule to Ext.P8 in its Clause B,

reads as follows:

"B. Group B/Class II Officers of the Central and State Service (Direct Recruitment): Son (s) and daughter (s) of:

(a) Parents both of whom are Class II Officers.

(b) Parents of whom only the husband is a Class II Officer and he gets into Class I at the age of 35 or earlier.

(c) Parents, both of whom are Class II Officers and one of them dies or suffers permanent incapacitation and either one of them has had the benefit of employment in any International Organisation like UN, IMF, World Bank etc., for a period of not less than 5 years before such death or permanent incapacitation.

(d) Parents of whom the husband is a Class I Officer (direct recruit or pre thirty five WP(C).No.2550/2020(P)

promoted) and the wife is a Class II Officer and the wife dies: or suffers permanent incapacitation; and

(e) Parents of whom the wife is a Class I Officer (Direct Recruit or pre thirty five promoted) and the husband is a Class II Officer and the husband dies or suffers permanent incapacitation:

Provided that the rule of exclusion shall not apply in the following cases:

Son (s) and daughter (s) of

(a) Parents both of whom are Class II Officers and one of them dies or suffers permanent incapacitation.

(b) Parents, both of whom are Class II Officers and both of them die or suffer permanent incapacitation, even though either of them has had the benefit of employment in any International Organisation like UN, IME, World Bank etc., for a period of not less than 5 years before their death or permanent incapacitation."

Therefore, it is evident that for exclusion of the candidate,

both the parents should be Class II Officers.

5. The classification of employees into Class I to

IV/Group A to D, is made in Government service. The

petitioner's mother is an aided school teacher. There is no

document before me to find that the aided school teachers

are also categorized into Class I to IV/Group A to D. In

Ext.P7, the District Collector has also noticed that there are WP(C).No.2550/2020(P)

no Government Orders categorizing aided higher secondary

school teachers as Class II.

6. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the

petitioner's application for non-creamy layer certificate is not

liable to be rejected on the basis of Ext.P8 Government

Order. In the circumstances, the petitioner is held to be

entitled to relief in this writ petition.

7. In view of the above, there will be a direction to the

2nd respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for

non-creamy layer certificate and issue a non-creamy layer

certificate to the petitioner, if the petitioner is otherwise

eligible.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE SR WP(C).No.2550/2020(P)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER DATED 16/11/2019.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 18/11/2019.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/01/2019 MADE BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR NEET EXAMINATION.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION FILED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED 15/02/2020.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM DATED 17/09/2020.

EXHIBIT P8 GO(P) NO.81/09/SCSTDD DATED 26/09/2009.

EXHIBIT P9 CIRCULAR NO.27396/F3/07/SCSTDD.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF GO(P) NO. 1/2015/BCDD DATED 01/01/2015 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR KEAM ENTRANCE EXAMINATION.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE DATED 13/03/2020 ISSUED IN THIS REGARD ON THE NEET (UG) PORTAL (NTANEET.NIC.IN) FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE CANDIDATES.

SR                       //TRUE COPY//                       PA TO JUDGE