Kavitha C.N vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 5919 Ker

WP(C) NO. 8762 OF 2022                 1



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
     TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2022 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                         WP(C) NO. 8762 OF 2022
PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS:

     1       KAVITHA C.N.,
             LPSA (DAILY WAGE), AIDED LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL,
             MANGODE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 503.

     2       SIVASANKARAN.T.,
             MANAGER, AIDED LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL, MANGODE,
             PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 503.

             BY ADVS.
             GEORGE ABRAHAM
             JOBY D JOSEPH


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

     1       STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL
             EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
     2       DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
             JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
     3       DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
             OFFICE OF THE DY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
             PALAKKAD-678 001.
     4       DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
             MANNARKAD, PALAKKAD-678 582.
     5       ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
             CHERPULASSERY, PALAKKAD-679 503.
             SRI SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE, SR GP


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   31.05.2022,   THE    COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 8762 OF 2022                    2




                                  JUDGMENT

The 2nd petitioner is the Manager of the Aided Lower Primary School,

Mangode. The 1st petitioner was appointed as LPSA on a daily wage basis in

the said school as per Ext.P1 order dated 01.12.2021. It is the case of the

petitioners that the staff fixation order made it clear that there were sufficient

vacancies. Since the 2nd petitioner was statutorily bound to appoint protected

teachers as per the extant Government Orders, he sought clarification from

the Deputy Director and by Ext.P5 communication, the 2nd petitioner was

informed that there were no protected teachers in Palakkad District or in the

neighbouring Districts. It was in the said circumstances that the 1st petitioner

was appointed on a daily wage basis. However, when the documents were

forwarded, the 5th respondent rejected the approval of the appointment by

Ext.P8 order. Challenging Ext.P8, the 2nd petitioner has preferred Ext.P9

appeal before the 4th respondent, which is stated to be pending. It is in the

afore circumstances that this writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P8

order issued by the 5th respondent and also for a further direction to the DEO

to consider Ext.P9 appeal within a time frame.

2. On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Government

Pleader that Ext.P9 was considered by the DEO and the same was rejected by

order dated 06.02.2022. Faced with the said submission, Sri. George

Abraham, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that

the 2nd petitioner be permitted to mount a challenge against the said order

before the 2nd respondent and prays that necessary directions be issued to

the 2nd respondent to consider the same in a time-bound manner.

3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions

made across the bar, this writ petition is disposed of by issuing the following

directions.

a) If the 2nd petitioner is in any way aggrieved by the order

passed by the 4th respondent rejecting Ext.P9 appeal, he may,

within a period of two weeks from today, mount a challenge, if he is

so advised, before the 2nd respondent.

b) If any such proceeding is initiated by the 2nd petitioner

before the 2nd respondent, the same shall be considered and

appropriate orders shall be passed expeditiously, in any event,

within a period of three months.

c) Before passing orders, the 2nd petitioner shall be afforded

an opportunity of hearing.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE IAP

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8762/2022

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1/12/2021.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF STAFF FIXATION ORDER DATED 15/7/2019 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 2/6/2019.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO (RT) NO.4761/2021/G.EDN DATED 22/10/22.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CLARIFICATION SOUGHT BY THE 2ND PETITIONER FROM THE DY.DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION DATED 30/11/2021.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 10/11/2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF CHANGE OF STAFF DATED 1/2/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, DATED 14/1/2022.

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE MANAGER DATED 24/1/2022.

Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DDEPKD/10687/2021-B3 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD, DATED 23/3/2022

Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E/2656/2021 DATED 26/3/2022 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER.

Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF JOINING REPORT OF SMT.VINITHA.T DATED 26/3/2022

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL