This appeal challenged orders directing the re-deployment of the sixth respondent instead of the appellant. Upholding the lower court, the High Court found no perversity in relieving the appellant from the post of UPSA and placing her in the Protected Teachers' list.
The writ appeal was dismissed and the impugned judgment was upheld.
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.M.SHAFFIQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BABU
FRIDAY ,THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 3RD PHALGUNA, 1940
WA.No. 680 of 2019
WP(C) 2556/2019 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER
MANJUSHA.C.K., AGED 35 YEARS W/O.SUDHEESH, UPSA, RAJA'S UP SCHOOL CHIRAKKAL,CHIRAKKAL, KANNUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.V.VENUGOPAL
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
W.A.680/2019
2
6 DHANYA P.S., LPSA, RAJA'S UP SCHOOL, CHIRAKKAL, CHIRAKKAL, KANNUR DISTRICT-670001.
OTHER PRESENT:
A.J.VARGHESE -SR.G.P SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.680/2019
3
JUDGMENT
Shaffique, J.
The petitioner was appointed as UPSA on 9.6.2008 in the aforesaid school. The 6th respondent was appointed as LPSA on 11.11.2011. By Ext.P4, order had been passed by the Deputy Director of Education on 24.11.2011 by which the petitioner had been relieved from the post of UPSA and she was directed to be included in the Protected Teachers' list.
W.A.680/2019
4
W.A.680/2019
5
category as LPSA or UPSA during the relevant time. Perusal of Ext.P17 dated 1.6.1999 would show that Sri.P.V.Sidharthan was appointed by the Management under the UPSA category. His appointment under the said category has also been approved by the Assistant Educational Officer. The contention urged by the petitioner is that since he was teaching in LPSA, he was treated as the LPSA teacher, especially when the categorisation had taken place between LPSA and UPSA. But insofar as it is clear from the appointment order that his appointment was as UPSA which was approved by the Educational authorities, merely for the reason that he was teaching in LPSA section by itself will not indicate that his appointment was as LPSA. Under such circumstances, the learned single Judge was justified in placing reliance upon Ext.P17 and treating the Headmaster as coming under UPSA section.
W.A.680/2019
6
finding of the learned single Judge, we do not think it necessary for us to interfere with the judgment.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE Judge
Sd/-
A.M.BABU Judge
Mrcs/22.2.
True copy
P.S.to Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondents were justified in relieving the appellant from her post and placing her in the Protected Teachers' list given the post categorisation confusion.
Whether the appointment and categorisation of the Headmaster as UPSA justified the action against the petitioner.
Whether the findings of the learned single Judge were perverse.
Manjusha.C.K.
State of Kerala
6th Respondent
A.M. Shaffique
A.M. Babu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
