In a writ petition, school counselors challenged a blanket ban on their transfers under the Kishori Sakthi Yojana, arguing it was arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights. The court found the claims devoid of merit and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933
WP(C).No. 4934 of 2011(N)
-------------------------
PETITIONERS
BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR
RESPONDENTS
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. P. NARAYANAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
W.P.(C) No. 4934 OF 2011
Dated this the 7th June, 2011
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners have approached this court with the following prayers:
“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions commanding the respondents not to impose any blanket ban on the transfers of school Counselors placed under Kishori Sakthi Yojana Project in different schools in the State;
ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions commanding the respondents to direct all the District Social Welfare Officers to consider all the applications for transfer submitted by the counselors in the State, on its subjective merits and pass orders thereon
iii) call for the entire records leading upto Exhibit P5 and quash the same by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions.
iv) Declare that the total ban imposed on transfers of the counselors placed in different schools under the Kishori Sakthi Yojana Project, is arbitrary, illegal and violative of the fundamental rights of the citizens;
2
W.P.(C) No. 4934 OF 2011
v) grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
“4. It is also submitted that the Government of India vide letter No.F.No.6/5/2009 RGSEAG-AG cell dated 30.11.2009 have intimated that KSY and NPAG will be replaced by SABLA. Accordingly the State Government have not proposed any budget provision for 2010-11 under KSY budget head. The State Government introduced a new scheme Psycho Social services under State Plan Scheme and the existing pilot project of school counseling programme in 163 schools under the erstwhile KSY Scheme was also merged in this State Plan Scheme and all the expenses of these school counseling programme is now
W.P.(C) No. 4934 OF 2011
3
being met by the State Government under the Psycho-Social Services Schemes and this office has not received any central assistance under KSY during 2010-11. The existing school counseling programme including that of the petitioners are being implemented by the State Government under the State Plan Fund. Exhibit P1 order produced by petitioners in this regard has no relevance in this case. It is the direction given by the Honourable Supreme court to Government of India for introducing a comprehensive universal scheme for the Empowerment of adolescent Girls. The Rajiv Gandhi Scheme for the Empowerment of Adolescent Girls (SABLA) has already been declared by Government of India vide Lr. No.6-12/2010RGSEAG dated 27.09.2010. The scheme have major 2 components one Nutritional Component and other Non-nutritional component. Initially the SABLA Scheme is implemented only in 4 districts in Kerala. The School counseling programme is not a component under SABLA scheme. Under the erstwhile KSY apart from the suggested scheme of the Government of India, the State Government had the option to initiate State specific activity and no such option is available under the SABLA Scheme. So the
4
W.P.(C) No. 4934 OF 2011
school counseling programme is not a part of Government of India scheme and the existing school counseling programme including the petitioner's schools, now comes under the State Government Scheme Psycho-Social Services to Adolescent Girls. since the existing 163 school counseling centres has been replaced as Psycho Social Services Scheme under the State Plan in 2010-11 and all the expenses of these school counseling programme are being met by the State Government under Psycho - Social Services scheme which is a State Plan scheme and the Social welfare department have no plan at present to start school counseling programme in all the Higher secondary Schools and the existing project is only a pilot project. Moreover the State Government is not intending to continue the school counseling programme under SABLA or KSY since the State Government have a state plan scheme for this purpose. ”
virtue of the stipulation under the particular Scheme of the State Government is none other than the Parent Teachers' Association and not the District Level authorities as contended by the
5
W.P.(C) No. 4934 OF 2011
petitioners. It is pointed out that the appointment of counsellors is not being made by the Committee chaired by the District Panchayath President and as per the Government direction dated 12.01.2009, it is being effected by the PTA, who is the implementing agency and that the PTA is not bound to effect transfer from one school to another school where there is another PTA. It is also pointed out that the third respondent/the Addl. Director of Social Welfare, is responsible to carry out the directions of the Government for implementation of the scheme and other departmental activities; that Loyola Extension Services is the Monitoring and Evaluation agency of the School counselling programme entrusted by the Government vide G.O. (Rt)No.152/10/SWD dated 18.03.2010; that as per the existing Government directions, the appointing authority of the counsellors is the PTA and no other agency than the appointing authority can make a transfer .
6
W.P.(C) No. 4934 OF 2011
counsellors formerly engaged under the Kishori Sakthi Yojana Scheme are functioning under the Psycho Social Service Scheme, which is a State Plan Scheme and that during 2010-11, there was no Government of India release under the Kishori Sakthi Yojana and further that the school counsellors are now being paid by the State Government from its plan fund under the Psycho Social Services Scheme.
In the above circumstance, this Court finds that the pleadings and prayers raised by the petitioners are devoid of any merit. No interference is warranted. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
lk
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should direct the State to allow transfers of school counselors under the Kishori Sakthi Yojana Project?
Whether the ban on transferring counselors placed in different schools is arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights?
Whether the records leading to Exhibit P5 should be called for and quashed by a writ of certiorari?
Kerala School Counsellors Association
Dhanya.T.S
The State of Kerala
The Director, Department of Social Welfare
The Additional Director, Department of Social Welfare
P.R. Ramachandra Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
