Allowed

Deepika.M.v. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Nov 2018WP(C)/7107/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed writ petition. Held that petitioner appointed as Music Teacher on 02.06.2008 is entitled to approval from that date with necessary monetary benefits as prior case law required no objection without list of protected teachers to Manager.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner entitled for approval with effect from date of appointment i.e. on 02.06.2008 and necessary monetary benefits shall be released within a period of four months.

Deepika.M.v. Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No.7107 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

DEEPIKA.M.V., AGED 34 YEARS, MUSIC TEACHER, A.H.S. PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, KOORAD, MALAPPURAM.

¶8

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

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

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

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM-676 505.

¶12

3 THE MANAGER, A.H.S. PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, KOORAD, MALAPPURAM-676 505.

¶13

BY ADVS. By SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.S.GOPINATHAN SRI.SAJI KURIACHAN

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No.7107 of 2018 2

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner was appointed on 02.06.2008 as a Music Teacher during the ban period. That is approved only with effect from 01.06.2011. In Ext.P2 order, it is stated that 18 protected teachers were available and the Manager had not appointed any protected teacher. It is to be noted that neither in the counter affidavit nor in the impugned order, respondents have a case that list of protected teachers was furnished to the Manager.

¶18

In the light of the judgment of this Court in State of Kerala v. Nadeera [2013 (2) KLT 88], it was held that in the absence of any list furnishing the names of protected teachers, there cannot be a reason for objection in approving the appointment of teachers. That be the case, the petitioner is entitled for approval with effect from the date of appointment i.e., on 02.06.2008 and necessary monetary benefits shall be released to the petitioner within a period of four months after passing appropriate orders.

¶19

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

WP(C).No.7107 of 2018 3

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶26

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 2-6-2008 ALONG WITH THE ENDORSEMENT OF APPROVAL. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(RT) NO.1828/2011 G.EDN DATED 18-05-2011.

¶27

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL.

¶28

//TRUE COPY//

¶29

P.A.TO JUDGE

¶30

Deepika.M.v. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepika.M.v. 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prathibha S Vs Maharshi Dayanand University

Smitha B Vs State of Kerala

Nikhila Peter Vs St.Teresa'S College (Autonomous)

Beena Rani Vs K. Johnson

Dr.Sajeevkumar G. Vs the State of Kerala

Ajay K Vs University of Calicut