Partly allowed

Sreelatha.T. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Nov 2018WP(C)/18388/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside the impugned Government order rejecting the petitioner's appointment as a School Assistant due to lack of accommodation. It directed the Government to reconsider the matter within three months after issuing notice to relevant parties.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P9 order set aside; Government directed to reconsider the matter within three months after notice to petitioner and relevant parties.

Sreelatha.T. Vs State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 23RD KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No.18388 of 2016

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SREELATHA.T. LPSA, A.U.P.S, KALLUVASHI,CHERPULASSERY, PALAKKAD - 679 514.

¶8

BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶11

2 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶12

3 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER MANNARGHAD - 678 582.

¶13

4 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHERPULASSERY, PALAKKAD - 679 503.

¶14

5 THE MANAGER

¶15

SABARI AIDED U.P SCHOOL, KALLUVASHI,CHERPULASSERY, PALAKKAD - 679 514.

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

SRI.S.GOPINATHAN, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

W.P.(C) No.18388/2016

¶20

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

The petitioner was appointed as Upper Primary School Assistant on

¶23

02.06.2003 in a vacancy due to the leave of one Smt.Sujitha. The appointment was initially approved upto 14.07.2003. Thereafter the petitioner was reappointed on 15.07.2003. On account of lack of accommodation in the school, approval was not granted.

¶24

The petitioner filed a revision petition before the Government. The Government passed Ext.P9 order. Paragraph 5 of the said Government Order reads as follows:

¶25

“5. Having examined all the records and arguments, it is found that the additional post for 2003-04 was not sanctioned for want of sufficient accommodation in the school during 2003-04. The Manager has also not filed appeal against the appointment approval of the petitioner from 2004-05. By considering the above facts there is no merit in the appeal petition for considering her the appointment approval of Smt.Sreelatha T, Lower Primary School Assistant, AUPS, Kalluvazhy from 15.07.2003 and hence rejected...”.

¶26

The petitioner's case is that the school is a pre KER school and Ext.P5 proceedings of the Joint Director of Public Instruction would clearly show that 18 rooms were sanctioned. It appears that the petitioner has not chosen to produce Ext.P5 before the Government.

¶27

W.P.(C) No.18388/2016

¶28

¶29

Learned Government Pleader points out that in fact the

¶30

Manager had appointed one Smt.T.S.Priya and there was no established vacancy. Anyhow, Ext.P5 order was not adverted by the Government in the impugned order. The Government had rejected approval for want of accommodation.

¶31

That being the case, the matter shall be reconsidered by the Government. To pave the way for reconsideration, Ext.P9 is set aside. The Government is directed to reconsider the matter within a period of three months, after notice to the petitioner, Manager and Smt.T.S.Priya.

¶32

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

smp

¶37

W.P.(C) No.18388/2016

¶38

¶39

APPENDIX

¶40

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶41

P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DT. 02.6.2003. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DPI DT. 05.7.2014. P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FRESH APPOINTMENT ORDER DT. 15.7.2003. P4 TRUE COPYOF THE STAFF FIXATION PROCEEDINGS DT. 03.9.2003 FOR THE YEAR 2003-2004. P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT DT. 03.9.2005. P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF AEO DT. 03.7.2015. P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DT. 29.9.2015. P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P9 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(RT) NO. 1401/2016/G.EDN. DT.15.4.2016. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER No.G.O. (Rt) 5864/2015/G.EDN DTD.14.12.2015. R4(b) THE APPELLATE ORDER OF DPI (G1/53515/2016/K.DIS DTD.31.08.2006) True Copy

¶42

P.S to Judge

¶43

smp

Sreelatha.T. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreelatha.T. 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

Leelamma Philip Vs State of Kerala

Sijimol C G Vs the Manager

T.Sivasankaran Vs Assistant Educational Officer, Cherpulassery

Nagle Vidhya Bhavan Vs State of Kerala

Sheeba Singh G.J Vs State of Kerala

V.P. Devassia Vs State of Kerala