Deeve Shantel Pigares vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 15363 Ker

WP(C) NO. 14542 OF 2021

                                     1


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
         THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943
                          WP(C) NO. 14542 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

              DEEVE SHANTEL PIGARES
              AGED 28 YEARS, D/O.ALBERT JUDY PIGARES, SHAL VILLA,
              KADUKUTTY P.O., THRISSUR 680315

              BY ADVS.
              SHERRY J. THOMAS
              JOEMON ANTONY


RESPONDENTS:

     1        STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
              DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
              TRIVANDRUM-695001

     2        THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF EDUCATION, (FORMERLY DPI)
              DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY,
              TRIVANDRUM-695014

     3        THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER,
              OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICE, PALACE ROAD,
              THRISSUR KERALA-680020

     4        THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
              OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICE, MALA,
              THRISSUR DISTRICT-680732

     5        THE CENTRAL BOARD OF ANGLO-INDIAN EDUCATION,
              REG.NO.9/1953, PERUMANOOR, ERNAKULAM-682015,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER IN CHARGE

     6        HEADMISTRESS/PRINCIPAL,
              LUIS ANGLO INDIAN U.P. SCHOOL, KADUKUTTY P.O.,
              CHALAKUY-680315

              SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, SR. GP
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 14542 OF 2021

                                           2




                                   JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:

"(i) Call for the entire records pertaining to the Exhibit P3 and set aside the same.

(ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ or Direction, directing to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P6, and approve the appointment of Petitioner forthwith in a time frame manner.

(iii) Direct the 3rd and 4th Respondents to reconsider Ext.P3 in the light of Exhibit P4 judgment within a time frame and approve the appointment of Petitioner."

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 had been appointed as LPSA in the 6th respondent school with

effect from 29.08.2018. It is submitted that the petitioner had earlier

worked as UPSA on daily wages. It is further submitted that the

appointment of the petitioner as LPSA from 29.08.2018 was declined to be

approved by Ext.P3 order on the ground that there is a senior claimant

who has yet to get approval of appointment. It is further stated that the

tenure of the manager has ended on 26.05.2018 and that therefore, the

appointment of the petitioner cannot be approved. WP(C) NO. 14542 OF 2021

4. Relying on Ext.P4 judgment of this Court, the learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that any dispute with regard to management cannot

stand in the way of the approval of the petitioner's appointment. It is

submitted that the de-facto doctrine has been applied by this Court in

several cases of identical nature. It is submitted that Ext.P4 is a judgment

which pertains to the very same management and this Court had directed

the consideration of approval of appointments made under the very same

management during the relevant period.

5. Having considered the contentions advanced, I notice that the

approval has already been rejected by Ext.P3 and the petitioner has taken

up the matter before the DGE in Ext.P6. It is therefore only appropriate

that the issue be considered by the DGE after referring to Ext.P4 judgment

as well, without raising objections with regard to the non approval of the

manager during the relevant period.

6. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, there will be a

direction to the 2nd respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on

Ext.P6 revision petition preferred by the petitioner, with notice to the

petitioner as well as the manager and after hearing them, through any

appropriate means, including video conferencing, within a period of two

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The findings in WP(C) NO. 14542 OF 2021

Ext.P4 judgment shall be specifically referred to by the 2 nd respondent

while passing orders as directed above. The petitioner shall produce a

copy of the writ petition along with a copy of this judgment before the 2 nd

respondent for compliance.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE NP WP(C) NO. 14542 OF 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 29/8/2018 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT

Exhibit P1A THE TRUE COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 29/8/2018

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 13.8.2012

Exhibit P2A THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 11.02.2013

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 09/10/2018

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.20814/2020 DATED 11.12.2020

Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/01/2021

Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 22/3/2021

Exhibit P6A THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 26/3/2021

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL