Dismissed

C.M.Bindu v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Jul 2019RP/1080/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of review petitions filed against the dismissal of writ appeals concerning the petitioner's appointment claim. The court held that the grounds raised, including reliance on a subsequent Apex Court judgment and new factual contentions, did not constitute valid legal grounds for review.

What did the court decide?

Review petitions RP 1080/2016, RP 71/2017, and RP 1088/2016 were dismissed.

C.M.Bindu Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶7

RP.No.1080 of 2016 IN WA. 1168/2015

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 1168/2015 IN WPC. 31748/2013 of HIGH COURT DATED 08-11-2016

¶9

REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT:

¶10

C.M.BINDU

¶11

W/O.RAJEEV MANIKOTH, AGED 35 YEARS, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.M.SAJJAD

¶13

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶15

2 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶16

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KANNUR DISTRICT-670001.

¶17

4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT-670101.

¶18

5 THE MANAGER MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670702.

¶19

6 THE HEAD MASTER MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670702.

¶20

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶21

¶22

7 SMT.P.V.BEENA UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT670702.

¶23

8 SMT.M.K.SHEENA HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MATHS) (SINCE 1/6/2010 UNAPPROVED), MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670702.

¶24

9 SMT.P.BINDU HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MATHS) (SINCE 01/06/2016 UNAPPROVED), MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670702.

¶25

10 SMT.SMITHA C.THOMAS HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MATHS) (SINCE 01/06/2016 UNAPPROVED), MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670702.

¶26

11 SMT.NAMBIAR JAYA RAVEENDRAN AGED 43 YEARS, W/O.SASIKUMAR, KARTHIKA KALLUR, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT (UPSA, MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL).

¶27

BY ADV. SRI.POOVAMULLE PARAMBIL ABDULKAREEM BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. SWAMIDASAN BY ADV. S.P. ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI BY ADV. C.P. PEETHAMPARAN

¶28

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.07.2019, ALONG WITH RP.71/2017, RP.1088/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶30

¶31

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶32

PRESENT

¶33

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶34

¶35

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶36

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶37

RP.No.71 of 2017 IN WA. 1105/2015

¶38

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 1105/2015 IN WPC NO. 10557/2013 of HIGHCOURT DATED 08-11-2016

¶39

REVIEW PETITIONER/6TH RESPONDENT:

¶40

C.M.BINDU

¶41

W/O RAJIV MANIKOTH, AGED 38 YEARS, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DIST.(RESIDING AT LAKSHMI NIVAS, P.O. CHAVASSERY (VIA) MATTANNUR, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DIST)

¶42

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

¶43

RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 & 7:

¶44

1 SMT.PRAMODINI N.K W/O ANANDAN, AGED 39 YEARS, UPSA, MATTANNUR HSS, MATTANNUR, RESIDING AT CHARANTHOTH HOUSE, PRNSS COLLEGE P.O (VIA) MATTANNUR, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DIST- 670 702.

¶45

2 SMT.PRASEEJA N.V.

¶46

W/O SANTHOSH KUMAR , AGED 39 YEARS, UPSA MATTANNUR HSS, MATTANNUR, RESIDING AT KRISHNA NIVAS KUYLOOR, PADIYOOR P.O. THALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DIST.

¶47

3 THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001

¶48

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶49

¶50

4 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 014

¶51

5 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER THALASSERY EDUCAITONAL DISTRICT KANNUR DISTRICT- 670 101

¶52

6 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT- 670 101

¶53

7 THE MANAGER MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, P.O.MATTANNUR, THALASSERY TALOUK, KANNUR DIST- 670 702

¶54

8 SMT.A SUJA AGED 39 YEARS, W/O BIJU NARAYAN UPPER PRIOMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL MATTANNUR (RESIDING AT LEELAAYALAM P.O. PUNNAD, (VIA) IRITTY, THALSSERY TALUK, KANNUR DIST- 670- 702

¶55

BY ADVS. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS R7 SRI.POOVAMULLE PARAMBIL ABDULKAREEM BY ADV. K.V. PAVITHRAN GOVT. PLEADER SRI. SWAMIDASAN

¶56

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.07.2019, ALONG WITH RP.1080/2016, RP.1088/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶57

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶58

¶59

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶60

PRESENT

¶61

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶62

¶63

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶64

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶65

RP.No.1088 of 2016 IN WA. 1104/2015

¶66

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 1104/2015 IN WPC. 16402/2014 of HIGH COURT DATED 08-11-2016

¶67

REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT:

¶68

C.M.BINDU

¶69

W/O RAJEEV, MANIKOTH, AGED 35 YEARS, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶70

BY ADVS.

¶71

SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR

¶72

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶73

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶74

2 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014.

¶75

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KANNUR DISTRICT 670 001.

¶76

4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 101.

¶77

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶78

¶79

5 THE MANAGER MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 702.

¶80

6 THE HEADMASTER MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 702.

¶81

7 SMT. JAYASREE HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (ENGLISH) (NOT APPROVED), MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 702.

¶82

ADV. K.V. PAVITHRAN ADV. P.P. ABDUL KAREEM GOVT. PLEADEWR SRI. SWAMIDASAN

¶83

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.07.2019, ALONG WITH RP.71/2017, RP.1080/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶84

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶85

¶86

ORDER

¶87

[ RP 1080/2016, RP.71/2017, RP.1088/2016 ]

¶88

A. Hariprasad, J.

¶89

Review petitioner is the appellant in W.A. Nos. 1104 and

¶90

1168 of 2015 and she is the 6^th respondent in W.A. No. 1105 of

¶91

¶92

All the appeals were considered by a Division Bench of

¶93

this Court and as per the judgment dated 8^th November 2016, the

¶94

appeals were dismissed confirming the judgment passed by the

¶95

learned Single Judge. Grievance of the petitioner is that her contentions – both factual and legal – were not properly considered

¶96

at the time of disposal of the appeals.

¶97

Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner

¶98

and the learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents.

¶99

Learned Government Pleader is also heard.

¶100

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶101

¶102

Learned counsel for the review petitioner contended

¶103

that her challenge against Ext.P12 in W.P.(C) No. 31748 of 2013 was

¶104

not considered by this court at the time of disposal of the appeals.

¶105

It is also contended that her claim for HSA (English) to a vacancy which arose on 1.6.2010 was also not considered despite the fact

¶106

that she had acquired the requisite qualification in the month of

¶107

April, 2007.

¶108

Learned counsel for the contesting respondents

¶109

pointed out that these factual issues were not raised before the

¶110

Division Bench at the time of hearing the writ appeals and there was

¶111

no occasion for the court to consider this aspect for

¶112

non-mentioning these points. Moreover, in the review petitions no

¶113

specific ground is raised regarding non-consideration of these aspects. Only at the time of hearing, these points are raised. Therefore, these contentions cannot now be urged in a review

¶114

petition.

¶115

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶116

¶117

Learned counsel for the review petitioner places

¶118

reliance on the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Manager,

¶119

VKNM Vocational Higher Secondary School v. State of Kerala ((2016)

¶120

4 SCC 216) to raise a contention that the review petitioner is entitled to make a claim for appointment. This submission is also

¶121

strongly opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents contending that this decision was not brought to the notice of this Court at the time of hearing and disposal of the appeals. Although it was pointed out that the decision was rendered on 27.1.2016 and the writ appeals were disposed only on 8.11.2016, it is evident that,

¶122

the above decision was not cited before this Court to establish the revision petitioner's claim. It is a settled principle that subsequent

¶123

change of law cannot be taken as a ground for review, and it cannot be used for unsettling the issues which are already settled. If at all

¶124

there is any remedy available to the review petitioner, it is only to

¶125

challenge the judgment before an appropriate forum.

¶126

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶127

¶128

Having heard the rival submissions, we are of the view

¶129

that none of the grounds raised for reviewing the judgment passed

¶130

by this Court on 8.11.2016 constitute a legal ground for review.

¶131

There is no error apparent on the face of the record. Therefore, the

¶132

review petitions are dismissed.

Sd/-

A.HARIPRASAD

JUDGE

Sd/-

SHIRCY V. JUDGE

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶140

¶141

APPENDIX OF RP 1080/2016

¶142

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶143

ANNEXURE I- TRUE COPY OF THE APEX COURT JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2016(4) SCC 216 DATED 27/01/2016. ANNEXURE IITRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.724/2014 DATED 02/06/2014. ANNEXURE IIITRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2009(3) KLT 488 03/07/2009.

//true copy//

Sd/-

P.S. To Judge

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶148

¶149

APPENDIX OF RP 1088/2016

¶150

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

//true copy//

Sd/-

P.S. To Judge

R.P.1080/2016 & CON. CASES

¶156

¶157

APPENDIX OF RP 1080/2016

¶158

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶159

ANNEXURE I-	TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT REPO SCC 216 DATED	THE APEX COURT RTED IN 2016(4) 27/01/2016.
ANNEXURE II-	TRUE COPY OF W.A.NO.724/20 02/06/2014.	THE JUDGMENT IN 14 DATED
ANNEXURE III-	TRUE COPY OF REPORTED IN 2 03/07/2009.	THE DECISION 009(3) KLT 488

¶160

//true copy//

¶161

Sd/-

¶162

P.S. To Judge

C.M.Bindu v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.M.Bindu v. the 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

Godfred Vs Union Bank of India

Thazhevazhayil Raghavan Nair Vs P.M.Nafeesa Basheer

Shanavas M. Vs Kanniakulangara Muslim Jama-Ath

Abdurasaque Haji.K.M Vs Kurikkalakath Sulaikha

K.P.Yousaf Hajee, Vs Kurikkalakath Farsana

C.M.Bindu Vs the State of Kerala