Bannish Kannoth vs The State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 28 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

     FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 16TH POUSHA, 1944
                     WP(C) NO. 40749 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:

    1     BANNISH KANNOTH
          AGED 46 YEARS
          S/O. KUNHIRAMA KURUP, HST (ENGLISH), KUTHUPARAMBA
          HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA P.O,
          KANNUR DISTRICT - 670643.

    2     DELISH K.M.,
          AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. DIVAKARAN, HST (SOCIAL SCIENCE),
          KUTHUPARAMBA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA P.O,
          KANNUR DISTRICT - 670643.

    3     FEMINA N,
          AGED 36 YEARS, D/O. VIJAYAN K. K., UPST, KUTHUPARAMBA
          HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA P.O,
          KANNUR DISTRICT - 670643.

    4     NIKIL P,
          AGED 31 YEARS, S/O. VALSAN, OFFICE ATTENDANT,
          KUTHUPARAMBA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA P.O,
          KANNUR DISTRICT - 670643.

    5     LIJINA K.,
          AGED 37 YEARS, D/O. GOPALAN, FTC EMPLOYEE, KUTHUPARAMBA
          HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA P.O, KANNUR
          DISTRICT - 670643.

          BY ADV K.B.GANGESH

RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE STATE OF KERALA
          REP. BY SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
          GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
 W.P. (C) No.40749 of 2022        2



      2       THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
              OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THALASSERY,
              KANNUR DISTRICT - 670104.

      3       THE MANAGER,
              KUTHUPARAMBA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL KUTHUPARAMBA P.O,
              KANNUR DISTRICT - 670643.

              SMT.ANIMA M, GP
              SRI.T.ASAFALI, FOR R3
              SMT.LALIZA T.Y


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P. (C) No.40749 of 2022            3




                                 JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking to quash Exts.P9 to P9(d) orders issued

by the 2nd respondent as per which the proposal for appointment of the

petitioners to various posts in the Kuthuparamba Higher Secondary School was

declined on the ground that litigation with respect to disputes over

management was pending before this Court.

2. The petitioners contend that the petitioners were appointed to

various posts by separate orders. The proposals were forwarded to the 2nd

respondent. However, the proposals were declined primarily on the ground

that the dispute over management was pending before this Court and

therefore, the appointments effected by the 3rd respondent cannot be

approved.

3. The petitioners assert that challenging the order issued by the

Government overturning the order issued by the DEO permitting the 3rd

respondent to function as Manager, the 3rd respondent had approached this

Court and by Ext.P7 interim order, this Court had stayed the Government Order.

The 3rd respondent approached this Court complaining that he was not

permitted to exercise powers of Manager and by Ext.P8 judgment in Cont. Case

(C) No.624/2022, this Court recorded the undertaking of the DEO that the

interim order would be complied with in its letter and spirit. According to the

learned counsel, in view of the above, there was no justification on the part of

the DEO to decline approval on the sole ground that litigation concerning

managerial disputes was pending before this Court. It is further submitted that

another reason given by the DEO is the pendency of W.P.(C) No.19808/2021

concerning the rights of persons with disabilities. It is submitted that the said

writ petition has been finally disposed of by judgment dated 10.8.2022 and in

that view of the matter, the said reason also cannot be sustained under law. It

is further submitted that other defects pointed out in Exts.P9 (b) and (d) are

minor in nature and curable.

4. I have heard Smt.Laliza, the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd

respondent and the learned Government Pleader.

5. I find that the predominant reason given by the 2nd respondent to

decline approval is the pendency of W.P.(C) No.25268/2021. By Ext.P7 interim

order, this Court had stayed the order issued by the Government handing over

the managership to the DEO. As is evident from Ext.P8 order issued in the

Contempt proceedings, the 3rd respondent was entitled to function as Manager,

and no interdictions were placed on the same. In that view of the matter, there

was no justification on the part of the 2nd respondent in declining approval.

Another reason stated is the stay granted by this Court in W.P.(C) No.

19808/2021 filed seeking enforcement of the rights of persons with disabilities.

The said writ petition has been finally disposed of by issuing certain directions

and observations, which stand clarified by the Division Bench. That being the

case, approval could not have been declined stating the pendency of the above

writ petition. If there are other minor defects, the 2nd respondent ought to

have granted an opportunity to the petitioners as well as the Manager to cure

the same.

6. In view of the discussion above, the petitioners are entitled to

succeed. Exts.P9 to P9 (d) orders issued by the 2nd respondent are quashed.

There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to reconsider the matter in the

light of the observations and directions above. The pendency of W.P.(C)

No.25268/2021 shall not be taken as a reason to decline approval. The 2nd

respondent shall pass fresh orders, expeditiously, in any event, within two

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, with notice to the

petitioners and the 3rd respondent.

This writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE Sru

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40749/2022

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER IN FORM 27 DATED 15.07.2021 ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT OF CHANGE OF STAFF.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER IN FORM 27 DATED 15.07.2021 ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT OF CHANGE OF STAFF DATED 15.07.2021.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER IN FORM 27 DATED 15.07.2021.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 4TH PETITIONER IN FORM 27 DATED 23.12.2021 ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT OF CHANGE OF STAFF.

Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 5TH PETITIONER IN FORM 27 DATED 23.12.2021 ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT OF CHANGE OF STAFF.

Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B6/719/2021 DATED 20.04.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WP(C) NO.

25268/2021 DATED 19.11.2021.

Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CCC NO.

624/2022 DATED 06.04.2022.

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B6/ 701/2022 K.

DIS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 02.06.2022.

Exhibit P9(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B6/692/2021 K. DIS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 02.06.2022.

Exhibit P9(b) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B6/702/2022 K.DIS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 2.6.2022.

Exhibit P9(c) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B6/5325/2022 N.DIS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH PETITIONER DATED 25.1.2022.

Exhibit P9(d) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B6/5326/2021 K.DIS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH PETITIONER DATED 24.1.2022.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL