Kerala High Court
N.K. Rafeeque vs State Of Kerala on 31 May, 2024
Author: Sathish Ninan
Bench: Sathish Ninan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 36738 OF 2015
PETITIONER:
N.K. RAFEEQUE
AGED 45 YEARS
HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT,C.H.MEMORIAL HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL, ELAYAVOOR PO, VARAM, KANNUR
DISTRICT, RESIDING AT ROSE MAHAL, PO VARAM,
KANNUR DISTRICT-670 594.
BY ADV SRI.P.M.PAREETH
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
2 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
KANNUR-670 001.
4 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
KANNUR-670 001.
5 MANAGER
C.H.MEMORIAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, ELAYAVOOR,
PO VARAM, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 594.
6 P.P.SUBAIR
HEAD MASTER C.H.MEMORIAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
ELAYAVOOR, PO VARAM, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 594.
BY ADVS.
SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE (SR.)
SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN, SR. GP.
WP(C) NO.36738 OF 2015
-: 2 :-
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 31.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Sathish Ninan, J.
----------------------
WP(C).No.36738 of 2015
-------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of May, 2024
JUDGMENT
The appointment of the 6th respondent as
'Headmaster' of the C.H.Memorial Higher Secondary School
is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The petitioner claims to be the senior most
HSA working in the C.H.Memorial Higher Secondary School.
There arose a vacancy of 'Headmaster' in the School. The
petitioner claims that he being the senior most, is
entitled for appointment to the post of 'Headmaster'.
However, overlooking his claim, the 5 th respondent -
Manager appointed 6th respondent who was working in
another School under the same management as Headmaster.
The same is under challenge in this writ petition. The
learned counsel for the petitioner rely on Rule 44 of
Chapter XIV A of the KER.
WP(C) NO.36738 OF 2015
3. Heard Adv.P.M.Pareeth, the learned counsel for
the petitioner, the learned senior counsel Sri.Grashious
Kuriakose on behalf of the Manager, and Sri.Bijoy
Chandran, the learned Senior Government Pleader.
4. It is not in dispute that the School in
question is a Minority Educational Institution. The Apex
Court, in Manager, Corporate Educational Agency v James
Mathew and Others [2017 (4) KHC 83], held that once
Management of a minority educational institution makes a
conscious choice of a qualified person from the minority
community to lead the institution as the Headmaster, the
Court cannot go into the merits of the choice or the
rationality or propriety of the process of choice. That
the 6th respondent is duly qualified, is not in dispute.
5. The law being settled as above, the contention
of the petitioner has no merit.
WP(C) NO.36738 OF 2015
Resultantly, the writ petition fails and is
dismissed.
Sd/-
Sathish Ninan, Judge
rsr
WP(C) NO.36738 OF 2015
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 36738/2015
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE
DATED 14.10.2014 TO THE EFFECT THAT THE
PETITIONER HAS PASSED THE KERALA
EDUCATION ACT AND RULES IN JULY 2011.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE
DATED 3.07.2014 TO SHOW THAT THE
PETITIONER HAS PASSED ACCOUNT TEST
HIGHER IN JANUARY 2014.
Exhibit P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPROVED
SENIORITY LIST IN RESPECT OF THE
TEACHERS OF THE SCHOOL FOR 2013.14.
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPOINTMENT
ORDER DATED 1.04.2014 ISSUED BY THE 5TH
RESPONDENT APPOINTING THE 6TH RESPONDENT
AS HEADMASTER.
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
29.04.2014 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
APPROVING THE INTER MANAGEMENT TRANSFER
OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY PHOTOCOPY OF APPEAL DATED
27.05.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
20.08.2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY PHOTOCOPY OF THE REVISION
PETITION DATED 18.10.2014 SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
03.10.2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
