Allowed

Smitha P.K. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Nov 2018WP(C)/21071/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala held that a school manager's failure to execute a required bond cannot defeat a teacher's right to appointment approval. Consequently, the petitioners' approvals were granted retrospectively from their date of appointment with monetary benefits ordered to be disbursed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners' approval granted retrospectively from date of appointment; monetary benefits to be disbursed within three months.

Smitha P.K. 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

FRIDAY ,THE 02ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 11TH KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 21071 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 SMITHA P.K. AGED 37 YEARS

¶8

LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT,NALLALAM ALP SCHOOL, NALLALAM, KOZHIKODE.

¶9

2 RAMYA K RAMAKRISHNAN LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT,NALLALAM ALP SCHOOL,NALLALAM, KOZHIKODE.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.AUGUSTINE JOSEPH SRI.GEORGE RENOY SRI.K.S.ROCKEY SRI.TONY AUGUSTINE

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001.

¶13

2 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KOZHIKODE-670001.

¶14

3 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER FEROKE, KOZHIKODE-670001.

¶15

4 NALLALAM ALP SCHOOL NALLALAM , KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER-670001.

¶16

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, Sri. S.GOPINATHAN SR

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.11.2018, ALONG WITH WP(C).7107/2018, WP(C).39998/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C)No. 21071/2018

¶19

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The petitioners were appointed as LPSA in Nallalam ALP School, Kozhikode under the jurisdiction of the Assistant Educational Officer, Feroke, Kozhikode in the year 2006. That was not approved, as there was a ban imposed by the Government. The Government by G.O.10/2010 dated 12.01.2010 relaxed the imposition of the ban, and ordered that all appointments in additional vacancy created from 2006-07 to 2009-10 should be approved only if the Manager execute a bond to appoint equal number of protected teachers from 2010-11 onwards. Since the Manager refused to execute bond, the AEO rejected the approval from the date of appointment. The petitioner's approval was granted only w.e.f 01.06.2011.

¶22

If appointments of the petitioners were admissible during 2006-07, not withstanding that the Manager had failed to execute bond, approval shall be given to them as though the Manager had

¶23

WP(C)No. 21071/2018

¶24

¶25

executed such bond. This Court in catena of decisions held that the failure of the Manager to execute bond cannot betray a teacher's

¶26

right to obtain approval in accordance with the law.

¶27

Therefore, the petitioners approval from the date of

¶28

appointment shall be considered within a period of two months.

¶29

The monetary benefits are allowed, same shall be disbursed

¶30

within a further period of three months.

¶31

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

JUDGE

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21071/2018

¶39

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶40

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE IST PETITIONER DATED 15.06.2006. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 5.06.2006. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.3390/2014 DATED 4.2.2014. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.5.2014 OF THE IST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO.2290/2015 DATED 25.07.2017.

¶41

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 4.5.2018 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶42

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶43

\TRUE COPY//

¶44

PA TO JUDGE

¶45

Smitha P.K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smitha P.K. 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

Thaneermukkom Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs K.Sreelatha

The Director, Rajagiri School of Engineering and Technology Vs A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technological University

M.P.Indu Vs the Assistant Educational Officer

Devadasan.G Vs the Vice Chancellor, University of Calicut

P.P.Prathapan Vs Assistant Educational Officer

Shini George Vs State of Kerala