Remanded

Anwar Sadath.E v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Aug 2009WP(C)/2946/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala ordered the setting aside of orders rejecting the petitioner"s appointment as a Physical Education Teacher. It directed the Government to reconsider the matter after hearings and pass appropriate orders within three months.

What did the court decide?

Orders setting aside rejection (Exhibits P6, P8) discharged; remanded to Government for reconsideration within 3 months.

Anwar Sadath.E Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2009 / 28TH SRAVANA 1931

¶5

WP(C).No. 2946 of 2009(A)

PETITIONER:

ANWAR SADATH. E, PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER, A.M. HIGH SCHOOL, VENGOOR, PATTIKKAD P.O., MANNARMALA, MALAPPURAM.

¶10

BY MR.K.JAJU BABU, ADVOCATE. MS.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, ADVOCATE. MR.BRIJESH MOHAN, ADVOCATE. MR.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, ADVOCATE.

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

¶13

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

¶14

THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM.

¶16

THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶17

THE MANAGER, A.M. HIGH SCHOOL, VENGOOR, PATTIKKAD P.O., MANNARMALA, MALAPPURAM.

¶18

BY MS. T.B. REMANI, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER. MR.T.R.SADEESAN, ADVOCATE, FOR R5.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C).No. 2946/2009

¶21

A P P E N D I X

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶23

EXT. P1	:	COPY OF DEGREE CERTIFICATE IN FACULTY OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION DTD. 15.6.98 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA.
EXT. P2	:	COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD. 15.7.05 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY R5.
EXT. P3	:	COPY OF ORDER No.K.DIS.A4-272/06 DTD. 2.3.06 OF R4.
EXT. P4	:	COPY OF ORDER No.K.DIS.B2-8610/08 DTD. 20.6.06 OF R3.
EXT. P5	:	COPY OF ORDER No.EM(4) 40336/2007/DPI.D.DIS DTD. 10.7.07 OF R2.
EXT. P6	:	COPY OF ORDER No.60345/K2/2007/G.EDN. DTD. 16.5.08 OF GOVT. OF KERALA, GENERAL EDUCATION (K) DEPARTMENT.
EXT. P7	:	COPY OF REVIEW PETITION DTD. 16.6.08 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, GOVT. OF KERALA.
EXT. P8	:	COPY OF ORDER No.66218/K.2/08/G.EDN DTD. 5.12.08 OF GOVT. OF KERALA, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT.
EXT. P9	:	COPY OF ORDER G.O.(MS) No.152/03/G.EDN DTD. 9.6.03 OF GOVT. OF KERALA, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT.
EXT. P10	:	COPY OF G.O.(Rt) No.975/06/GL.EDN OF GOVT. OF KERALA, GENERAL EDUCATION (A) DEPARTMENT.
EXT. P11	:	COPY OF G.O.(Rt) No.682/2007/G.EDN DTD. 14.2.07 OF GOVT. OF KERALA, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT.

¶24

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL.

// True Copy //

P.A. to Judge.

smp

T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

¶29

--------------------------------------W.P.(C) No.2946 OF 2009

¶30

Dated this the 19^th day of August, 2009.

¶31

J U D G M E N T

¶32

The petitioner is working as Physical Education Teacher in the A.M. High School, Vengoor in Malappuram District. He was appointed as such from 01.06.2005 against a sanctioned post. Exhibit P2 is the copy of the order of appointment issued later whereby the petitioner was given appointment with effect from 15.07.2005.

¶33

The proposal for approval stands rejected on the ground that a protected Physical Education Teacher ought to have been appointed. Exhibit P3 is the said order. Exhibit P4 is the order passed in appeal and Exhibit P6 is the order passed by the Government agreeing to the above view. Even though the petitioner filed a review petition before the Government as per Exhibit P7, that was also rejected as per Exhibit P8.

¶34

The stand taken by the petitioner in the writ petition is that at no point of time, the Manager was informed about the

¶35

W.P.(C) No.2946/2009

¶36

¶37

availability of protected teacher for appointment. It is also pointed out that in respect of other schools in the same District, approvals have been granted as per Exhibits P9 and P10. Exhibit P11 is also produced which is in respect of the directions issued by the Government to approve the appointment of Sri.P.Dileep, Physical Education Teacher in Malappuram District.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a reading of Exhibits P10 and P11 will show that the Government has directed the approval of appointments made on the ground that protected teachers were not available. It is pointed out that a reading of Exhibit P11 shows that the Government was of the view that “even though there were 18 protected Physical Education Teachers at the time of the appointment of the petitioner teacher, all the above teachers were retained in their parent schools, and hence no protected Physical Education Teachers were available for deployment”. In that view of the matter and after finding that the Management has appointed a protected teacher from 01.12.2006, the appointment of the said teacher was directed to be approved from 01.12.2006.

¶39

W.P.(C) No.2946/2009

¶40

¶41

In ground (C) of the writ petition, the petitioner has averred that the Manager has complied with the directions in G.O.(P) No.178/02/G.Edn dated 28.06.2002 by appointing one Smt.K.M.Sreelatha, a protected sewing teacher with effect from 31.03.2008. It is the contention of the petitioner that there is no impediment at present for approving the appointment of the petitioner as Physical Education Teacher.

¶42

Therefore, the orders Exhibits P6 and P8 are set aside. The matter will be reconsidered by the Government, after hearing the petitioner and the Manager, in the light of the grant of approval as per Exhibits P10 and P11 orders. Appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for compliance.

¶43

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶44

T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE

¶45

smp

Anwar Sadath.E v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anwar Sadath.E 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

The Manager, Kottayam Raja'S High School Vs State of Kerala

Sheena M. Vs State of Kerala

Sudheesh.R.S Vs Assistant Educational Officer

State of Kerala Vs Mayakumari.M.

Sini Abraham Vs State of Kerala and Others

K.Giresh Kumar Vs the State of Kerala and Others