[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Sajina.C.K vs Central Board Of Secondary Education on 4 December, 2025
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
2025:KER:93930
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 45690 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
SAJINA.C.K,
AGED 44 YEARS, W/O ANILKUMAR.P, UTHRADAM,
MACHERI.P.O. MOWNCHERY KANNUR-, PIN - 670613.
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD
SRI.A.RENJIT
SHRI.GOKUL R.NAIR
SHRI.ANSALAM N.X.
RESPONDENTS:
1 CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
COMMUNITY CENTRE, PETER VIHAR, NEW DELHI -
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 110092.
2 THE REGIONAL OFFICER,
CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION,
PUKKATTUPADY RD, UNNICHIRA, THRIKKAKARA,
EDAPPALLY, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM,
KERALA, PIN - 682021.
W.P.(C)No.45690 of 2025
:2:
2025:KER:93930
3 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
KANNUR KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670001.
4 THE MANAGER
THUNCHATHACHARYA VIDYALAYAM EDACHOVVA,
P.O.CHOVVA KANNUR-, PIN - 670006.
5 THE PRINCIPAL
THUNCHATHACHARYA VIDYALAYAM EDACHOVVA,
P.O.CHOVVA KANNUR-, PIN - 670006.
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.VENUGOPAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.NIRMAL S, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 04.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.45690 of 2025
:3:
2025:KER:93930
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 4th day of December, 2025
The petitioner states that she was working as a
Malayalam Teacher at Thunchathacharya Vidyalayam, a CBSE
Senior Secondary School, since 01.06.2006. Initially, she was
appointed as a Primary Teacher and later, promoted as
Secondary School Teacher. She has rendered over 15 years of
continuous, commendable service without any break or
complaint.
2. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the petitioner
effectively performed her duties through online platforms. With
the permission of the School Management and Principal, she
enrolled for the M.Ed. Course under Kannur University, initially
conducted online, allowing her to continue her teaching
responsibilities. When the Course shifted to offline mode, the
2025:KER:93930
petitioner obtained sanctioned leave from 01.03.2022 to
30.08.2022, with provision for a substitute Teacher. Due to
administrative delays at the University, she sought an extension
of leave up to 30.11.2022, which was orally permitted.
3. After completing the Course, the petitioner
attempted to rejoin duty on 01.12.2022, but was denied
permission to sign the attendance register without any written or
oral reason. Despite repeated representations dated
02.01.2023 (Ext.P1), 15.05.2023 (Ext.P2) and Ext.P3 lawyer
notice issued on 07.03.2024, the Management failed to
respond. The petitioner further submitted Exts.P4 and P5
representations to respondents 2 and 3 on 22.12.2024 and
14.03.2025 respectively, but no action has been taken.
4. Owing to her illegal termination, the petitioner
has lost significant service benefits, including loss of future
prospects amounting to ₹33,08,760/-, Gratuity of ₹1,83,548/-,
Retrenchment Compensation of ₹1,59,075/- and notice pay of
2025:KER:93930
₹21,210/-. Being overaged and unemployed, she faces severe
financial hardship, contends the petitioner.
5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the
petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel representing
respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Government Pleader
representing the 3rd respondent.
6. The petitioner was working as a Teacher
under the Thunchathacharya Vidyalayam, Edachovva, Kannur.
The petitioner is before this Court aggrieved by the termination
of her services.
7. It is not in dispute that the School where the
petitioner has been working under the 4th respondent is a
Private CBSE School, not falling within the ambit of
'instrumentality of the State'. Therefore, no writ can be issued
against respondents 4 and 5 in a service matter.
8. Counsel for the petitioner would urge that the
petitioner has approached the Regional Officer of the Central
2025:KER:93930
Board of Secondary Education, who is the 2nd respondent
herein, raising the grievance regarding termination of service.
9. In view of the judgment of this Court in
Sommy Kunjappan and Others v. Central Board of
Secondary Education and Others [2019 (1) KLT 864] and
Sindhu S. and Ors v. Raja Ravi Varma Central School and
others [2022 (5) KLT 219], the CBSE authorities will also be
not justified in interfering with the dispute between the employer
and employee of a Private Unaided Educational Institution. In
view of the above, the relief sought for by the petitioner in this
writ petition cannot be granted.
The writ petition is dismissed. This will be without
prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the
appropriate forum for any relief.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
ams
2025:KER:93930
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 45690 OF 2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
4TH RESPONDENT ON 02.01.2023
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
4TH RESPONDENT ON 15.05.2023
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE HER LAWYER TO
THE 4TH RESPONDENT ISSUED ON 07.03.2024
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS DATED
22.12.2024
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS DATED
14.03.2025
