Allowed

Nanda Shaji, v. Union of India

Kerala HC7 Sept 2020WP(C)/17232/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A minor ward sought to continue her 12th standard at her current Navodaya school despite her father's transfer and subsequent relief. The High Court, citing compassionate grounds and the COVID-19 pandemic, granted the admission as a non-repeating special case to avoid irreparable prejudice.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 2, 3, and 4 directed to allow the petitioner to complete her 12th standard at the appealed school.

Nanda Shaji, Vs Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 16TH BHADRA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.17232 OF 2020(D)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

NANDA SHAJI, AGED 17 YEARS, REPRESENTED THROUGH HER FATHER SHAJI K.N., AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. NEELAKANTAN G., VAISHNAVAM, THUMPAMANTHODI, MADATHARA P.O., KOLLAM, KERALA-691 541.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.SUSHANTH.J. SRI. GIGI PAPPACHAN SRI.ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY CHAIRPERSON, NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITHI, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT, SHASTRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110 001.

¶11

2 THE COMMISSIONER, NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITHI, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, B15, INSTITUTIONAL AREA, SECTOR 62, NOIDA, BUDHU NAGAR, UTTAR PRADESH-201 309.

¶12

3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITHI, HYDERABAD REGION, NALLAGANDLA, GOPANAPALLI, HYDERABAD-500 019.

¶13

4 THE PRINCIPAL, JAWAHAR NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA, ETC POST, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM (DISTRICT), KERALA-691 531.

¶14

R1 BY SMT.MAHESWARY.G., CGC SRI.M.K PADMANABHAN NAIR, SC

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No.17232 OF 2020(D)

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner, who is a young girl of 17 years, has approached this Court seeking that she be allowed to continue and complete her 12^th standard in the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Kottarakara. According to her, she had secured admission in this school as a ward of her father, who was a teacher there; but that since he has now been transferred to Guntur, as is evidenced from Ext.P2, she has been asked to discontinue her studies in the fourth respondent school and to join the Navodaya school at Guntur. She says that on account of ongoing Covid - 19 pandemic scenario, her displacement at this stage in this fashion would destroy her future irreparably. She thus prays that respondents 2 to 4 be directed to allow her to complete her 12^th standard in fourth respondent school as a special case.

¶20

Sri.M.K.Padmanabhan Nair, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya submits that, as per the norms applicable to the school and to the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samithi, the ward of a teacher will have to move along with his or her father/mother and therefore, that the petitioner's continuance in the fourth

¶21

¶22

WP(C).No.17232 OF 2020(D)

¶23

respondent school is legally untenable. He says that the petitioner's father had been transferred validly but that he had contested the same before the Central Administrative Tribunal by launching at least three litigations but that he has lost all of them, thus leading to him being relieved on 23.11.2019. The learned standing counsel submits that in spite of the fact that the petitioner's father has been so relieved, he has refused to join Guntur and therefore, that the continuance of the petitioner in the fourth respondent school cannot be now permitted.

¶24

Even when I find some force in the afore submissions of Sri.M.K.Padmanabhan Nair, the learned standing counsel for the school, it is without doubt that the year 2020 has presented extra ordinary impediments for everyone. It is no different for the petitioner and therefore, if she is to be transferred to Guntur now, it would be impossible for her to join the said school or to continue her studies, which certainly would irreparably prejudice her future.

¶25

I, therefore, asked the learned standing counsel for the fourth respondent school as to if the petitioner's case can be considered as a special one, to which he submitted that his client does not want any prejudice to be caused to the

¶26

¶27

WP(C).No.17232 OF 2020(D)

¶28

petitioner and that they were only acting as per law in directing her to join the school at Guntur. He says that if this Court is so inclined, the petitioner can be allowed to continue, however, only as a special case and on the condition that this will not be treated as a precedent even in analogous circumstances in future.

¶29

Taking note of the afore submissions and since this Court cannot countenance the causing of any prejudice to the petitioner or to her life on account of the disputes between her father and the school, I am certainly of the view that this is a special case; and therefore, taking note of the rather extenuating circumstances on account of the Covid - 19 pandemic, I am firm that she should be allowed to continue this year and complete her 12^th standard from the fourth respondent school.

¶30

Needless to say, these directions are being issued in the specific nature of the circumstances presented and is not intended to act as a precedent in any case, be that even which presents analogous facts.

¶31

In the result, this writ petition is allowed and respondents 2 to 4 are directed to allow the petitioner to continue her 12^th standard in the fourth respondent school,

¶32

¶33

WP(C).No.17232 OF 2020(D)

¶34

thus leading to her being able to take the examination as a student of the said school once the academic year is completed.

¶35

I clarify that these directions are intended only to help the petitioner for this academic year and no other.

¶36

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

stu

¶39

WP(C).No.17232 OF 2020(D)

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX

¶42

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶43

EXHIBIT P1	THE TRUE COPY OF 2919 3210 OF THE	THE ADHAR CARD BEARING NO.8417 PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE 2019 ISSUED BY 3R	OFFICE ORDER DATED 6TH SEPTEMBER, D RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE TO THE 3RD RESPON PETITIONER.	REPRESENTATION DATED 25.11.2019 DENT BY THE FATHER OF THE
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE TO THE 4TH RESPON RESPONDENT.	LETTER DATED 10.12.2019 ADDRESSED DENT OFFICE OF THE 2ND
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE TO THE FATHER OF RESPONDENT.	LETTER DATED 23.3.2020 ADDRESSED THE PETITIONER BY THE 4TH
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE TO THE 4TH RESPON PETITIONER.	LETTER DATED 28.4.2020 ADDRESSED DENT BY THE FATHER OF THE
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE THE 4TH RESPONDEN PETITIONER.	LETTER DATED 6.5.2020 ISSUED BY T TO THE FATHER OF THE
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE TO THE 4TH RESPON RESPONDENT.	LETTER DATED 4.8.2020 ADDRESSED DENT BY THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND

¶44

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

¶45

//TRUE COPY//

¶46

P.A TO JUDGE.

Nanda Shaji, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nanda Shaji, v. Union of India

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

G. Balakrishnan Nair Vs Vibushan

K.G.Anilkumar Vs Reena Mohandas

Mallika Thampuran Vs Mr.M.Ravi Kumar @ Ravinandana Menon

P.K. Prakash Vs Deputy Director of Higher Education Kottayam

Rukmani @ Balamani Amma Vs Accountant General (a and E) of Kerala

K.K.Kurian, Vs the Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.