Shijo David. C vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 22974 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
   TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 23077 OF 2021




PETITIONER/S:

          SHIJO DAVID. C
          AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.LATE C.T.DEVASSY,
          WORKING AS HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (MATHEMATICS),
          CMS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, THRISSUR,
          UNDER THE CORPORATE MANAGER, CMS MANAGEMENT,
          ROUND WEST, THRISSUR-680001,
          RESIDING AT CHITTILAPPILLY HOUSE, PARAPPUR P.O.,
          THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680552.

          BY ADV J.JULIAN XAVIER



RESPONDENTS :


    1     THE STATE OF KERALA
          REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
          HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

    2     THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
          JAGATHI, THYCAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

    3     THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
          HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682011.

    4     THE CORPORATE MANAGER,
          CMS CORPORATE MANAGEMENT, ROUND WEST,
          THRISSUR-680001.
 WP(C) NO. 23077 OF 2021           2




     5     SMT.SHERIN FRANCIS.C,
           AGED 40 YEARS, W/O.ANIL K.PAPPACHAN,
            RESIDING AT KAINIKKARA HOUSE,
           CHUVANNAMANNU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT,
           PIN-680652.

           BY ADVS.
           T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR
           R.K.MURALEEDHARAN

           SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN, SR. GP


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   23.11.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 23077 OF 2021             3




                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that she is presently working as an approved

High School Teacher in the CMS Higher Secondary School, Thrissur. A

vacancy in the post of HSST (Mathematics) arose in the school. The

petitioner in the said circumstances preferred a representation before the

manager and requested that the petitioner be promoted to the post of

HSST. The petitioner contends that though the petitioner is the rightful

claimant who is entitled to be promoted to the post of HSST (Mathematics)

by way of appointment by transfer as contemplated under Rule 4 of

Chapter XXXII of the Kerala Education Rules, the 5th respondent, a rival

claimant, approached this Court and sought for directions to the DGE to

consider her representation and take a decision. The petitioner contends

that the intention of the 5th respondent was to defeat the legitimate right

of the petitioner. In the said circumstances the petitioner has also

preferred representation before respondents 1 and 2 and sought for

issuance of directions to the Manager to appoint the petitioner as HSST

(Mathematics). The petitioner contends that without considering the

representation filed by the petitioner expeditious steps are being taken to

consider the representation filed by the 5 th respondent in view of the

orders passed by this Court. In the said circumstances, the petitioner

approached this Court and filed RP No. 831 of 2021 seeking to review the

judgment dated 30.9.2021 in W.P. (C) No. 17465/2021 and the same is

pending. It is in the above backdrop that the petitioner is before this Court

seeking directions.

2. I have heard Sri.Julian Xavier the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner, Sri. R K Muralidharan, the learned counsel appearing for the

party respondent and the learned Government pleader.

3. It is submitted by the learned Government pleader that since the

representation filed by the petitioner is pending consideration of the

second respondent, the same can be taken up along with representation

filed by the petitioner in WP (C) No. 17465 of 2021 and orders can be

passed. Sri. R.K. Muralidharan, the learned counsel appearing for the party

respondent submitted that he has no objection to adopting the said

course.

4. In that view of the matter there will be a direction to the second

respondent to take up the representation filed by the petitioner and

consider the same along with the representation filed by the fifth

respondent and pass orders with notice to the petitioner, the Corporate

Manager and the fifth respondent. In order to facilitate the same, the time

granted to the second respondent to pass orders by judgment dated

30.9.2021 in W.P. (C) No. 17465/2021 will stand extended by a period of

two months.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

NS

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23077/2021

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :

EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.04.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.10.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE WRIT PETITIONER THROUGH REGISTERED POST BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.10.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL