Maidhily.M vs The State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 10791 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
                                     &
              THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
         Thursday, the 19th day of October 2023 / 27th Aswina, 1945
                             WA NO. 1664 OF 2023

    AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 09/08/2023 IN WP(C) 16651/2019 OF THIS COURT

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

     MAIDHILY M., DEPUTY HEADMISTRESS (RETIRED), HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
     MUNDUR, MUNDUR P.O., PALAKKAD- 678592. RESIDING AT 5/116, VISHNU
     BHADRA, GANESH NAGAR, KALPATHY P.O., PALAKKAD - 3.

BY ADVS.M/S. KALEESWARAM RAJ, THULASI K. RAJ,

APARNA NARAYAN MENON & CHINNU MARIA ANTONY

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

  1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT
     OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
  2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695014. NOW AT
     DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION JAGATHY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,KERALA
     695014.
  3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD - 678001.
  4. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD- 678001.
  5. THE MANAGER ,HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MUNDOOR, MUNDOOR P.O.,
     PALAKKAD - 678001.
  6. ACCOUNT GENERAL (A & E), OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A &E),
     THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 TO R4

     This Writ Appeal coming on for orders on 19/10/2023 upon perusing
the appeal memorandum the court on the same day passed the following:
 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ.

---------------------------------------------

Writ Appeal No.1664 of 2023

--------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of October, 2023

REFERENCE ORDER A.Muhamed Mustaque, J This matter requires an authoritative pronouncement

as to the exemption granted under Rule 44A of Chapter

XIV-A of Kerala Education Rules to appoint Headmasters in

an aided school. Prior to the amendment in the year

2015, rules were clear. There are two categories of

teachers, who can claim for appointment of headmasters.

The first one is the teachers those who have crossed the

age of 50 years and who have no test qualification and

the other is the teachers who have the test qualification

but not crossed the age of 50 years. Inter se seniority will have to be reckoned within the category for the

purpose of appointment as headmasters.

2. A judgment of this Court in Narayanann A. v.

Vijayalakshmi P.And others [2020 KHC 417] acknowledged these two categories and ordered that preference has to

be given to teachers having test qualification based on

the amendment w.e.f. 1.06.2015. Apparently, in that

process, the Division Bench omitted to note that yet

another category is formed by the amendment, which is

precisely the argument of the learned counsel for the Writ Appeal No.1664 of 2023

..2..

appellants Ms.Thulasi K. Raj. According to the learned

counsel, there is yet another category who is having test

qualification and crossed the age of 50 years and in the

amendment preference is given to those who have test

qualification and crossed the age of 50 years. In that

sense, any senior who crossed the age of 50 years and

does not have test qualification will be superseded by a

junior who crossed the age of 50 years having test

qualification. This argument is essentially based on

explanatory note to the amendment. Narayanan case (supra) was proceeded as though there is no such

category. The law laid down in that case appears to be

on an incorrect premise.

3. Having heard the argument of the counsel and

having looked at the explanatory notes as above, it

appears to us that the intention of the amendment was to

give preference to juniors who have crossed the age of 50

years and possessed test qualification in preference to

seniors who crossed the age of 50 years and who does not

possess test qualification.

4. In view of the above, we are of the view that

the matter requires an authoritative pronouncement by a

Larger Bench. We place this matter before the Honourable Writ Appeal No.1664 of 2023

..3..

the Chief Justice for consideration to constitute a

Larger Bench.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE,JUDGE

Sd/-

SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE PR

19-10-2023 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar