Rethimol R vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 5098 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

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

                       WP(C).No.1576 OF 2021(V)


PETITIONER:

               RETHIMOL R.
               AGED 41 YEARS
               WIFE OF R.DEEPAK, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MALAYALAM),
               VISWAMBHARATHI MODEL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,.
               P.O.KRISHNAPURAM, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
               (RESIDING AT PRASANTHI, P.O.CHADAYAMANGALAM,
               KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 534.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
               SRI.V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL
               EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT ANNEXE II,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

      2        THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
               JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

      3        THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
               ALAPPUZHA-688 001.

      4        THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
               MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 101.

      5        THE MANAGER, VISWAMBHARATHI MODEL HIGHER SECONDARY
               SCHOOL,
               P.O.KRISHNAPURAM, KAYAMKULAM,
               ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 533.


               T. RAJASEKHARAN NAIR SR GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.1576 OF 2021(V)

                                        2



                                   JUDGMENT

Dated this the 11th day of February 2021

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

"i) call for the records relating to Exhibits P2 and P3 orders and set aside the originals of the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order.

ii) call for the records relating to Exhibits P6 and set aside the original of the same to the extent it classify the employees entered service before 31.03.2019 and after 31.03.2019 for purpose of exemption from K-TET by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order.

iii) declare that the appointment of the petitioner as High School Assistant (Malayalam) from 06.06.2019 is legally valid and sustainable.

iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 4th respondent DEO, Mavelikkara to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner as High School Assistant (Malayalam) from 06.06.2019 forthwith,

v) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders upon Exhibit P7 after hearing the petitioner within a time frame."

WP(C).No.1576 OF 2021(V)

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner

that the petitioner was appointed as HSA (Malayalam) on

06.06.2019 in a retirement vacancy in the 5th respondent-School.

However, the approval was declined on the reason that the details

were not correctly recorded in the appointment order and that

the K-TET Certificate was not produced. It is stated that the appeal

preferred before the Deputy Director of Education was also

rejected by Ext.P3 order. It is submitted that as against the

rejection, the petitioner has moved a revision petition before the

Government as Ext.P7 and that the same is pending.

4. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that an

appeal has been moved by the Manager before the Director of

General Education and therefore the Director of General

Education can be directed to consider the issue.

5. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, I am

of the opinion that since the petitioner has preferred Ext.P7

revision petition before the Government and since the petitioner WP(C).No.1576 OF 2021(V)

claims that she is entitled to approval of appointment de hors the

contentions that she has not acquired K-TET, the issue has to be

considered by the Government in accordance with law and in the

light of the orders of exemption granted by the Government.

There will, accordingly, be a direction to the 1 st respondent

to take up, consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 revision petition

preferred by the petitioner within a period of three months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall

be put on notice and heard through any appropriate means

including video conferencing before orders are passed.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SVP WP(C).No.1576 OF 2021(V)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 06.06.2019.

    EXHIBIT P2             TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B5/11593/19
                           DATED 05.05.2020 OF THE DEO,
                           MAVELIKKARA,

    EXHIBIT P3             TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

NO.B3/211991/2020 DATED 21.09.2020 OF THE DDE, ALAPPUZHA.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF KTET.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO.194/2019/G.EDN DATED 15.11.2019 OF THE GOVERNMENT.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION MOVED BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DATED 08.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2014(4) KHC DECIDED ON 28TH OCTOBER 2014.