Disposed

P.Syamkumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Dec 2008WP(C)/30790/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged his retrenchment and sought appointment against an available vacancy. The court directed the respondent DEO to approve the petitioner's past service and consider his claim for the UPSA vacancy within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed DEO to approve petitioner's appointment from 14/11/2007 to 14/07/2008 and consider claim for UPSA vacancy within four weeks.

P.Syamkumar Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2008 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1930

¶4

WP(C).No. 30790 of 2008(M) --------------------------

¶5

PETITIONER(S): --------------P.SYAMKUMAR, S/O C.N.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI SWARNAMALA HOUSE, ERAVIPEROOR P.O., THIRUVALLA (LG HINDI TEACHER RETRENCHED), NSS HIGH SCHOOL, VAIPUR).

¶6

BY ADV. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND

¶7

RESPONDENT(S): ---------------

¶8

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ATTINGAL.

¶12

DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA.

¶13

GENERAL MANAGER & INSPECTOR, NSS SCHOOLS,PERUNNA P.O., CHANGANASSERY.

¶14

HEADMASTER, NSS HIGH SCHOOL, PALOD.

¶15

ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER (SR.) FOR R6 SRI.P.GOPAL FOR R6

¶16

SHRI.A.J.VARGHESE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WPC NO.30790/2008

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

¶21

P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11/07/2007 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.6.

¶22

P2 : COPY OF the ORDER DATED 26/10/2007 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4.

¶23

P3 : COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 17/06/2005.

¶24

P4 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14/07/2008 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.6.

¶25

P5 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30/07/2008 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC NO.23070/2008.

¶26

P6 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18/09/2008 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2.

¶27

P7 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01/10/2008 SUBMITTED BEFORE RESPONDENT NOS.4, 5, 6 & 7.

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE.

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

W.P.(C) No. 30790 of 2008

¶33

Dated this the 9^th day of December, 2008

¶34

J U D G M E N T

¶35

The petitioner was an HSA (Hindi) working in NSS High School, Othara. By Ext.P1 order, he was reverted as Lower Grade Hindi Teacher and posted at NSS High School, Palode, where a vacancy arose consequent on the reversion of a teacher as Part Time Hindi Teacher. By Ext.P2 order, the 4^th respondent declined approval against which the petitioner and Manager filed revisions before the 2^nd respondent. During pendency of the revisions, with effect from 14/11/2007 the petitioner was transferred from Palode to NSS HS Vaipur. In that school, the petitioner continued till 14/07/2008, when by Ext.P4, he was ordered to be retrenched, consequent on the staff fixation order and taking the view that he had no lien as Lower Grade Hindi Teacher.

¶36

The petitioner and Manager submits that thereafter he is working on daily wage basis with effect from 30/07/2008 at NSS High School, Kunnanthanam. In the meanwhile, the 2^nd respondent allowed the revisions by Ext.P6 order dated 18/09/2008 and directed approval of his appointment following Ext.P1 with effect

¶37

W.P.(C) No.30790/2008

¶38

-2-

¶39

from 13/07/2007. The petitioner now submits that consequential order has already been passed by the DEO, Attingal, covering his service in NSS HS, Palode. According to the petitioner, his service at NSS HS, Vaipur has to be approved and his retrenchment consequent on Ext.P4 will have to be cancelled, and he should be permitted to continue in the school.

¶40

The Manager in the counter affidavit also confirmed availability of a post of Lower Grade Hindi Teacher in NSS HS Vaipur, and also confirmed that there is a vacancy of UPSA at NSS HS, Kunnanthanam with effect from 02/06/2008, and according to him, as the petitioner is qualified to hold the post of UPSA, he could be accommodated against that post.

¶41

Admittedly, the controversy which arose out of Ext.P2 order of the 4^th respondent rejecting the appointment of the petitioner as Lower Grade Hindi Teacher, is now given a quietus by Ext.P6 order by the 2^nd respondent. It was in the meanwhile the petitioner was retrenched by Ext.P4, mainly adopting the reason stated in Ext.P2 which has been reversed by Ext.P6.

¶42

Now, that Ext.P6 governs the authorities, and as the petitioner’s appointment in NSS HS Palode has already been approved, it is only consequential that the DEO, Thiruvalla under

¶43

W.P.(C) No.30790/2008

¶44

-3-

¶45

whose jurisdiction the NSS HS, Vaipur comes, also approves his appointment with effect from 14/11/2007.

¶46

The petitioner challenges his retrenchment effected by Ext.P4 mainly relying on Ext.P6, and as the Manager also submits that there is a vacancy of UPSA in NSS HS, Kunnathanam with effect from 02/06/2008, his claim for being accommodated against that vacancy also needs to be considered by the DEO in the light of Ext.P6. Therefore, I direct the 5^th respondent to consider the approval of the appointment of the petitioner with effect from 14/11/2007 to 14/07/2008 as Lower Grade Hindi Teacher in NSS HS, Vaipur, and also his claim for accommodation as UPSA in NSS HS, Kunnanthanam, in the vacancy of UPSA that is available from 02/06/2008. This, the DEO shall consider and pass orders thereon as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶47

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶48

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)

¶49

P.Syamkumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Syamkumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Quereshi Aftab Dawood Vs Shri.D.D.Ingty

S.Purushothaman Vs Authorised Officer/Dy.Tahsildar(Rr),Ekm.

V.Mamukoya Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Antony

M.Thomas Vs the State of Kerala

O.Beena Vs the State of Kerala and Others