George Dixon Fernandez vs The Secretary To Government
2022 Latest Caselaw 7718 Ker

WP(C) NO. 20912 OF 2022         1




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
  TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944


                    WP(C) NO. 20912 OF 2022


PETITIONER:

           GEORGE DIXON FERNANDEZ
           AGED 50 YEARS
           S/O LATE VARGHESE FERNANDEZ
           HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (SOCIAL SCIENCE)
           ST JOSEPH'S HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
           THALASSERY, KANNUR
           PIN - 670101

           BY ADVS.
           ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH
           K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH)



RESPONDENTS:

    1      THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
           DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
           GOVT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM
           PIN - 695001

    2      THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION
           HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM , PIN - 695001

    3      THE REGIONAL DEUPTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
           EDUCATION
           REGIONAL DIRECTORATE OF THE
           HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, KANNUR
           PIN - 670001

    4      THE CORPORATE MANAGER
           CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY ,
           DIOCESE OF KANNUR, P.O. CHOVVA, KANNUR
 WP(C) NO. 20912 OF 2022           2



            PIN - 670006

    5       HENRY ANTONY
            HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT,
            ST JOSEPHS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
            THALASSERY, KANNUR
            PIN - 670101




            SMT NISHA BOSE, SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER




     THIS    WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON   28.06.2022,   THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 20912 OF 2022               3




                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking declaration that

the petitioner is the only qualified hand available under the 4th

respondent for appointment as HSST (History) as on 01.06.2018 and also

for an issuance of directions to the 4th respondent to appoint the

petitioner in the place of the 5th respondent with effect from 01.06.2018.

2. The petitioner asserts that a vacancy had arisen in the

St.Joseph's Higher Secondary School with effect from 01.06.2018

consequent to the retirement of a certain Joseph Kizhakedath. Though the

petitioner is the person qualified for the post, overlooking him, the 5th

respondent was appointed. He asserts that he had earlier approached

this Court and by Ext.P2 judgment dated 21.08.2018, directions were

issued to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner and to

take a decision. According to the petitioner, by Ext.P3 order, the

appointment of the 5th respondent was approved. Challenging the same

the petitioner is stated to have preferred an appeal before the 1st

respondent. Though various other reliefs are sought for, when the matter

came up for admission, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submitted that directions be issued to the 1st respondent to consider and

pass orders in Ext.P4 appeal within a timeframe.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader.

4. I find that in Ext.P2 judgment, this Court had directed to

defer the approval of appointment pending consideration of the

representation. The learned counsel asserts that the approval has not

been granted till date. In that view of the matter, if approval has not been

granted till date, the same shall be deferred till the disposal of the appeal

as directed above.

In view of the discussion above, this Writ petition will stand

disposed of by issuing the following directions.

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

consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4, after

affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically

or virtually, to the petitioner herein or his authorized

representative and the party respondents.

2. Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously,

in any event, within a period of three months from the

date of production of a copy of this judgment.

3. It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of

the writ petition along with the judgment before the

concerned respondent to ensure compliance.

This writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE IAP

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20912/2022

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1      TRUE COPY OF THE SENIORITY LIST ISSUED BY
                THE 4TH RESPONDENT

Exhibit P2      TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.8.2018
                IN WP(C)28113/18 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

Exhibit P3      TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. E(1)
                161371/2020/D.G.E DATED 21.1.2022

Exhibit P4      TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE 1ST
                RESPONDENT DATED 19.2.2022

Exhibit P5      TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE
                3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16.2.2022

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

                NIL