This writ petition challenged an order rejecting the petitioner's appointment. The Court set aside the rejection order, directing the District Educational Officer to reconsider the matter afresh after hearing interested parties within two months.
Impugned order set aside; matter remanded to District Educational Officer to be heard afresh within two months.
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 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WP(C).No.15524 of 2017
PETITIONER:
RAJANI M.R.
AGED 31 YEARS, W/O.RAJESH.R, MALLIKAVILASOM, PANTHALAKODE.P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WORKING AS HSA (SOCIAL SCIENCE),SSVGHS, CHERAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.NEMOM CHANDRA BABU
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KOCHAR ROAD, PAZHAYASALAI,VALLIYASALAI,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695036.
3 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695101.
4 THE MANAGER SSVGHS, CHERIYANKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695304
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.S.GOPINATHAN, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.15524/2017
2
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner, aggrieved by Ext.P5 order passed by the District Educational Officer, Attingal, approached this Court. The matter is related to approval of appointment. As disclosed in the impugned order, the reason for non approval was on the ground that certain appointments in the school are not approved and are pending.
persons referred in Ext.P5, it is appropriate the District Educational Officer considers the matter afresh.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The District Educational Officer shall consider the matter afresh, after hearing the petitioner, the Manager and any affected persons within a period of two months.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
JUDGE
smp
W.P.(C) No.15524/2017
3
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 01.06.2016 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 20.12.2016 UNDER THE RTI ACT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS GIVEN BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT OFFICE DATED 11.01.2017. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.03.2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) 7618/2017. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER DATED 17.04.2017 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.
True Copy
P.S to Judge
smp
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the District Educational Officer should re-con sider the rejection of appointment approval now that conflicting factual assertions exist.
Whether an impugned administrative order rejecting approval of an appointment should be set aside when new evidence suggests prior approval existed.
Whether the District Educational Officer must consider the matter afresh and hear the petitioner within a specified time limit.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
RAJANI M.R.
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
THE MANAGER SSVGHS
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
