Sajitha Manat vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 2202 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

   WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 30TH POUSHA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.1525 OF 2021(M)


PETITIONER:

               SAJITHA MANAT
               AGED 44 YEARS
               W/O. MOHANAN P, THEJUS, P.O. NIRMALAGIRI,
               KANNUR-670 701.

               BY ADV. SRI.POOVAMULLE PARAMBIL ABDULKAREEM

RESPONDENTS:

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

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

      3        DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
               OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
               KANNUR-670 002.

      4        DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
               OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
               THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 101.

      5        MANAGER
               KUTHUPARAMBA HIGH SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR
               DISTRICT-670 643.

               SR GP, NISHA BOSE

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.1525 OF 2021

                                          2




                                  JUDGMENT

Dated this the 20th day of January 2021

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

"i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass final orders on Ext.P7 revision petitions as expeditiously as possible in the light of Ext.P5 judgment.

ii) To issue a writ of certiorari to set aside denial of approval in Ext.P1 as they are illegal and unjustifiable.

iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 4 th respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as HSA (Natural Science) from 01/06/2010 to 31/05/2011, and to disburse all consequential monetary benefits due to them forthwith.

iv) To declare that the petitioner is entitled to get approval to her respective post in the light of Ext.P5 judgment."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner was appointed as UPSA

on 01.07.2004 in the 5th respondent's school and the appointment was

duly approved. On 01.06.2010, in an additional division vacancy, the

petitioner was appointed as HSA (Physical Science). On the ground

that there was a ban on creation of posts during the relevant time, the WP(C).No.1525 OF 2021

petitioner's appointment was not approved. It is submitted by the

learned counsel for the petitioner that Ext.P7 revision petition has

been submitted by the petitioner before the Government seeking

approval of her appointment. It is contended that since the

petitioner's appointment is under Rule 43, Chapter XIV A, KER, it is

liable to be approved and the only reason for non-approval of the

same is that the Manager had not submitted a bond in terms of G.O(P)

10/10/G.Edn. dated 12.01.2010. It is submitted that the appointment

of the petitioner has been approved only with effect from 01.06.2011.

4. The learned Government Pleader submits that all

appointments in additional division vacancies are liable to be

apportioned in the ratio 1:1 and if the appointment of protected

teacher is not made as provided in G.O(P) 10/10/G.Edn. dated

12.01.2010, then the Manager should at least have submitted a bond

stating that such appointments would be made in accordance with the

provisions of the Government Order. It is also not known whether the

instant case is one where the Manager has challenged the G.O(P)

10/10/G.Edn. dated 12.01.2010 and whether the issue is pending

before the Apex Court.

WP(C).No.1525 OF 2021

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

opinion that Ext.P7 revision petition preferred by the petitioner is

liable to be considered by the 1st 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)

10/10/G.Edn. dated 12.01.2010. 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.

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

respondents to consider Ext.P7 revision petition, after hearing the

parties within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the hearing can be

conducted by any appropriate means, including through video

conferencing. In case the petitioner is found eligible for approval with

effect from the initial date of appointment, the monetary benefits

shall also be disbursed within a period of three months thereafter. WP(C).No.1525 OF 2021

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE NP WP(C).No.1525 OF 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1.6.2010 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K.DIS/B6/4843 DATED 14.1.2011 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE TYPED COPY OF THE SAME.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER B6/6571/10/D.DIS DATED 30.8.2010 FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2010-11 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CLARIFICATIONLETTER NO.60930/J2/11/G.EDN DATED 25.10.2011 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.6.2015 IN WPC NO.16555/2013 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 3.3.2017, THUS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 1.1.2021 THUS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL