Petitioner, a school assistant in an uneconomic school, challenged rejection of her regular scale of pay. Court held that due to insufficient student strength, initial approval for daily wages was correct, dismissing the writ petition.
None granted; writ petition dismissed with direction to maintain school records properly.
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
WP(C).No. 24184 of 2018
PETITIONER:
INDU P.V. W/O. BIGESH, AGED 30 YEARS,LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT,ATTADAPPA NO. II L.P SCHOOL,ATTADAPPA (P.O), KANNUR 670 006.
BY ADV. SRI.C.AJITH KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
WP(C).No. 24184 of 2018
..2..
BY ADV. SRI.NIKHIL JOHN
S.GOPINATHAN SRGP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
..3..
WP(C).No. 24184 of 2018
JUDGMENT
The impugned order is issued pursuant to
the directions of this Court in W.P.(C) No.20269/2017. Petitioner's approval for regular scale of pay in an uneconomic school has been rejected on two grounds: (i) the manager failed to appoint a protected teacher, (ii) school being an uneconomic one, the petitioner can be appointed on daily wages.
petition after adverting to the decision of
the Division Bench of this Court in State of
Kerala v. Nadeera [2013 (2) KLT 88 (DB)] . Taking note of the above, this Court
specifically directed that the eligibility of the petitioner therein for appointment in
WP(C).No. 24184 of 2018
..4..
regular scale of pay has to be examined after adverting to minimum average student strength and also eligibility of the petitioner for regular appointment against the minimum required staff even in an uneconomic school. The question of protected teacher does not arise inasmuch as no list was furnished. The question is whether the petitioner is eligible for regular scale of pay. In the impugned order, after taking note of the students' strength it was find clear that the school does not have sufficient students strength and
therefore the petitioner can be given
approval only on daily wages.
school is an uneconomic one and the petitioner
was given approval only on daily wage basis, I
WP(C).No. 24184 of 2018
..5..
find no reason to interfere with the impugned order.
Accordingly, the writ petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
JUDGE
PR/10.12.2018
WP(C).No. 24184 of 2018
..6..
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 01/12/2008 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B/7363/08.K.DIS DATED 22/12/2008 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B6/332/09 DATED 27/02/2009 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B3/6315/09 DATED 31/03/2009 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G4/77951/09/DPI/K.DIS DATED 09/03/2010 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE LIST OF EXCESS TEACHERS WORKING WITHOUT SALARY, WHICH INCLUDES THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B/5401/2011/K.DIS DATED 08/12/2011 OF THE 5THR RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B6/11262/11/K.DIS DATED 28/03/2012 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT WITH TYPED COPY
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G4/62541/2006/DPI/K.DIS DATED 25/10/2012 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF MANAGEMENT OF 6TH RESPONDENT SCHOOL
WP(C).No. 24184 of 2018
..7..
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B/192/2012/K.DIS DATED 24/11/2012 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 06/12/2012 SUBMITTED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. G4/3464/2013/DPI/K.DIS DATED 08/02/2013 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. G4/18509/2013/DPI/K.DIS DATED 15/04/2013 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 08/05/2013 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF G.O(RT) NO. 4470/2014/G.EDN DATED 24/10/2014 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN W.P(C) NO. 20269/2017 EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28/02/2018 IN W.P(C) 20269/2017. EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF THE HEARING NOTE DATED 13/06/2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/06/2018 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
WP(C).No. 24184 of 2018
..8..
EXHIBIT P20 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 58604/J2/12/G.EDN DATED 06/11/2012 RELIED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXT. P19 ORDER EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT SCHOOL FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 WITH TYPED COPY EXHIBIT P22 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT SCHOOL FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 WITH TYPED COPY EXHIBIT P23 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT SCHOOL FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 WITH TYPED COPY EXHIBIT P24 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT SCHOOL FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 WITH TYPED COPY EXHIBIT P25 TRUE COPY OF G.O NO. G4/33833/12/DPIK.DIS DATED 09/07/2012.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for regular scale of pay in an uneconomic school given insufficient student strength.
Whether the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's claim for regular scale of pay warrants interference.
Whether failure to appoint a protected teacher constitutes a valid ground for rejecting regular scale.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Kerala v. NadeeraExplained¶26
State of Kerala v. Nadeera [2013 (2) KLT 88 (DB)]
Indu P.V.
State of Kerala
The Director of Public Instructions
Additional Director (Academic)
The District Educational Officer
The Assistant Educational Officer
A.Muhamud Mustaque
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
A.Muhamud Mustaque
Parties & counsel
