Partly allowed

State of Kerala v. Suma R.

Kerala HC1 Nov 2021WA/1182/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the State's writ appeal by setting aside the single judge's judgment but permitted the writ petitioner to withdraw the writ petition. The writ appeal filed by the appointed peon against the finding on service conditions was dismissed based on the withdrawal of the writ petition without prejudice to future separate proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw the writ petition. Writ appeal by State allowed; writ appeal by employee dismissed.

State of Kerala Vs Suma R. — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WA Nos.1182 and 1411 of 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶6

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

¶8

MONDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶9

WA NO. 1182 OF 2021

¶10

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 34486/2019 OF HIGH COURT OF

¶11

KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶12

APPELLANT/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WP(C):

¶13

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

¶14

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.

¶15

3 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER PALAKKAD-678001.

¶16

SR GP SRI.A J VARGHESE

¶17

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER & 4TH RESPONDENT IN WP(C):

¶18

1 SUMA R. PEON, AIDED UP SCHOOL, VALLIKODE P.O., PALAKKAD-678593.

¶19

2 THE MANAGER AIDED UP SCHOOL, VALLIKODE P.O., PALAKKAD-678593.

¶20

OTHER PRESENT:

¶21

ADV DR GEORGE ABRAHAM,

¶22

ADV P GOPAL

¶23

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.11.2021, ALONG WITH WA.1411/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

WA Nos.1182 and 1411 of 2021

¶25

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶27

PRESENT

¶28

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶29

¶30

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. MONDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶31

WA NO. 1411 OF 2021

¶32

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 34486/2019 OF HIGH COURT OF

¶33

KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶34

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶35

SUMA R AGED 31 YEARS PEON, AIDED UP SCHOOL, VALLIKODE P.O, PALAKKAD 678 593 BY ADV GEORGE ABRAHAM ADV P GOPAL

¶36

RESPONDENT:

¶37

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001 2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014 3 ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD 678 001

¶38

4 THE MANAGER AIDED UP SCHOOL, VALLIKODE P.O, PALAKKAD 678 593

¶39

OTHER PRESENT:

¶40

SR GP SRI.A J VARGHESE

¶41

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.11.2021, ALONG WITH WA.1182/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶42

WA Nos.1182 and 1411 of 2021

¶43

¶44

JUDGMENT

¶45

A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

¶46

As both these writ appeals arise out of the same judgment dated 19.01.2021 of the learned Single Judge in WP(C)No.34486 of 2019, they are taken up together for consideration and disposed by this common judgment.

¶47

WA No.1182 of 2021 is filed by the State against the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge that held that the upper educational qualification stipulated in the Special Rules for the Kerala Last Grade Service, 1966, would not apply to the appointment of a Peon in an Aided Upper Primary School since it would otherwise cause violence to the prescriptions of Notes 1 and 2 of Rule 1 of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Act. By the impugned judgment the learned Single Judge had also set aside Exts.P4 and P6 orders that were impugned in the writ petition, and issued a direction to the third respondent to reconsider the proposal of approval of the appointment of the petitioner as a Peon in the Aided Upper Primary School, Vallikode, de hors the objections edificed on her having acquired graduation.

¶48

While the writ appeal was being heard, the writ petitioner, whose writ petition had been allowed by the learned Single Judge, also

¶49

WA Nos.1182 and 1411 of 2021

¶50

¶51

filed a separate appeal - WA No.1411 of 2021 against the finding of the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment that held that the petitioner having been appointed as a non-teaching staff in an aided school after 01.10.1964, it was the provisions of Chapter XXIVB of the KER that governed his service conditions and not Chapter XXIVA of the KER.

¶52

During the course of the hearing of these appeals, and on a query posed by the Bench as to whether there was a challenge to the relevant statutory provisions in the writ petition, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the writ petitioner, and the learned counsel for the Manager of the school, that the judgment of the learned Single Judge cannot be sustained in the light of the prayers that were sought in the writ petition. They, therefore sought permission to withdraw the writ petition itself, so that they could pursue the matter before an appropriate forum in separate proceedings.

¶53

We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the writ petitioner as also the learned counsel for the Manager of the school, and taking note of the difficulties expressed by them, as also the legal impediment in sustaining the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge, we permit the writ petitioner to withdraw the writ petition.

¶54

Accordingly, WA No.1182 of 2021 is allowed by setting aside the

¶55

WA Nos.1182 and 1411 of 2021

¶56

¶57

impugned judgment, consequent to the permission granted to the writ petitioner to withdraw the writ petition itself. WA No.1411 of 2021 preferred by the writ petitioner is also dismissed based on the withdrawal of the writ petition by the writ petitioner.

¶58

The upshot of the above discussion is that the judgment of the learned Single Judge impugned in these appeals is set aside and WP(C)No.34486 of 2019 is dismissed as withdrawn, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to pursue the matter before an appropriate forum in separate proceedings.

¶59

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶60

Sd/- MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. JUDGE

¶61

dlk 26.10.2021

State of Kerala v. Suma R.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Suma R.

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

Johaan George Vs State of Kerala

The Manager, Vs the State of Kerala

Gokul Govind Vs State of Kerala

Raji Joseph, Vs State of Kerala

Sree Nihtyananda Vidya Kendra Vs the Principal, Swami Nihtyananda Polytechnic College

Suma R Vs State of Kerala