S.Shaj vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 6467 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

 TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                   WP(C).No.4631 OF 2021(D)

PETITIONERS :-

      1     S.SHAJ, AGED 50 YEARS
            H.S.A. (SOCIAL STUDIES),
            K.K.M HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VANDITHAVALAM,
            PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

      2     PREMDEELIMA G.S.
            UPSA, K.K.M HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
            VANDITHAVALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

            BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM

RESPONDENTS :-

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

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

      3     DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
            PALAKKAD - 678 001.

      4     THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
            PALAKKAD - 678 014.

      5     THE MANAGER,
            K.K.M. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VANDITHAVALAM,
            PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 534.

            BY SMT.NISHA BOSE, SR. GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.4631 OF 2021(D)

                                   -: 2 :-


                               JUDGMENT

Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2021

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

"(i) To issue a Writ of Mandamus; or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to approve the appointments of the petitioners from 05.06.2006 onwards as HSA/UPSA.

(ii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus; or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to consider Exts.P6 and P7 revision petitions filed by the petitioners."

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 1st petitioner was appointed as HSA in an additional

division vacancy in the 5th respondent's school and the 2nd

petitioner was appointed in the consequential vacancy of UPSA.

The appointments were approved from 1.6.2007. However, the

period from 5.6.2006 to 31.5.2007 was not approved. It is

submitted that the petitioners have preferred Exts.P6 and P7

revision petitions before the Government and that the same are

liable to be considered in accordance with law. It is submitted that

since the appointment is during the ban period in an additional

division vacancy, the Government may consider the revision WP(C).No.4631 OF 2021(D)

petitions deeming that a bond has been executed by the Manager

in terms of G.O.(P) No.10/10/G.Edn. dated 12.1.2010.

4. The learned Government Pleader submits that Exts.P6

and P7 revision petitions are liable to be considered together by

the Government and appropriate orders shall be passed.

5. Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the

opinion that Exts.P6 and P7 revision petitions preferred by the

petitioners are liable to be considered by the 1 st respondent, in

accordance with law. In the light of the binding judgments of the

Division Bench of this Court, the question of approval shall be

considered deeming that the Manager has executed the bond as

required under G.O.(P) No.10/10/G.Edn. dated 12.1.2010. Even in

case the Manager has approached the Apex Court with a challenge

to the Government Order, I am of the opinion that the deeming of

execution of bond is liable to be taken into account, subject to the

orders to be passed by the Supreme Court in the pending matters.

There will be a direction to the 1 st respondent to take up

and consider Exts.P6 and P7 revision petitions preferred by the

petitioners with notice to the petitioners as well as the 5 th

respondent and pass appropriate orders thereon after hearing the

parties through any appropriate means including by video WP(C).No.4631 OF 2021(D)

conferencing within a period of three months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Jvt/26.2.2021 WP(C).No.4631 OF 2021(D)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 05.06.2006.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2006-07.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 7576/2011 DATED 10.01.2012.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL GRANTED TO SMT.

KRISHNAVENI T.M. BASED ON THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT ORDER.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(RT) NO.

167/2020 DATED 10.01.2020.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 12.02.2021 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 12.02.2021 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE