Disposed

Sijo Sebastian v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Dec 2017WP(C)/12070/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the 2nd respondent to approve the petitioner's appointment as L.D Clerk effective 01.06.2016, considering a specific amendment to the KER, and to pass orders within one month. The petition was disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Direct the 2nd respondent to approve the petitioner's appointment as L.D Clerk effective 01.06.2016 considering the amendment to KER and pass orders within one month.

Sijo Sebastian Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/21ST AGRAHAYANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 12070 of 2017 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SIJO SEBASTIAN, S/O.K.A.SEBASTIAN, AGED 35 YEARS, L.D.CLERK, ST.JOSEPH'S HIGH SCHOOL, KIZHAKKAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM, RESIDING AT 'KUREEKKAL HOUSE', KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO, ERNAKULAM.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF SRI.T.SAILESH KUMAR

¶9

SRI.M.H.ASIF ALI

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶12

2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ALUVA, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ALUVA 583 561.

¶13

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION ERNAKULAM, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM, 682 011.

¶14

4. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶15

5. THE MANAGER, ST.ANTONY'S CHURCH CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, ST.JOSEPH'S CENTRE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM 683 562.

¶16

R1-R4 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. E.S. ASHRAF R5 BY ADV. SRI.SARATH S. JANARDANAN

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

PBS

¶19

WP(C).No. 12070 of 2017 (G)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1.6.2016 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT

¶23

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO. B3/3247/16/K.DIS DATED 2.3.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶24

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF G.O(P) 29./216/G.EDN DATED 29.1.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶25

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR BEARING NO. 951951/J2/2016/G.EDN DATED 9.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶26

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF GO(P) NO. 134/2016/G.EDN DATED 5.8.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE

PBS

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶33

W.P.(C) No.12070 OF 2017

¶34

Dated this the 12^th day of December, 2017

¶35

J U D G M E N T

¶36

The prayers in this writ petition are as follows:

¶37

“i. call for records leading up to Ext.P2 and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction.

¶38

ii. Issue writ of mandamus, or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 2^nd respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as L.D Clerk w.e.f 01.06.2016 and sanction and disburse salary with arrears within the time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court.”

¶39

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶40

3. Exhibit P2 is the order rejecting the approval of the appointment of the petitioner in a clerical post.

¶41

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2^nd respondent. It is stated that the petitioner had been appointed as Clerk in a retirement vacancy with effect from 1.6.2016. It is stated that the approval for the said appointment was rejected by Exhibit P2 order. In paragraph 3 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner's appointment can be approved in the light of the amendment to the KER dated 3.12.2016. It is stated that it is not specifically stated in Exhibit P3 that the

¶42

W.P.(C) No.12070 OF 2017

¶43

¶44

Government Order dated 29.1.2016 is repealed and this had caused the confusion which led to the rejection by Exhibit P2.

¶45

In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to take up and consider and pass orders on the proposal for approval of appointment of the petitioner as Clerk with effect from 1.6.2016 in the light of the amendment to the KER. Orders of approval, shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶46

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶49

sab

Sijo Sebastian v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sijo Sebastian 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Corporate Manager Vs State of Kerala

Dr. Sophiammal Nattar P. Vs Deputy Director of Collegiate Education

Elizabeth Mani Vs State of Kerala

Govindan Namboothiri Vs Government of Kerala

The Manager Vs State of Kerala

Umesh Nandakumar A.K. Vs Kerala Agricultural University