Allowed

Sanalkumari K. v. the Director of Public Instructions

Kerala HC11 Oct 2021WP(C)/14458/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of two writ petitions involving a teacher's suspension regularization and a manager's disciplinary appeal. Since the manager who gave an undertaking died, the court directed the Deputy Director of Education to expeditiously hear the pending appeal while considering the teacher's representations within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Deputy Director of Education to hear the pending appeal and the petitioner's representation within two months, affording opportunity of hearing to both parties.

Sanalkumari K. Vs the Director of Public Instructions — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶5

MONDAY, THE 11^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 19TH ASWINA, 1943

¶6

WP(C) NO. 14458 OF 2019

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

SANALKUMARI K. AGED 56 YEARS W/O.CHANDRAN, RTD. HEADMISTRESS, A.L.P.SCHOOL, POOLUR, KOZHIKODE, RESIDING AT PAKALEDATH VEEDU, CHERUVATTA PARAMBIL P.O., MARIKKUNNU (VIA), KOZHIKODE-673571.

¶9

BY ADVS. B.KRISHNA KUMAR SRI.DINESH THANKAPPAN SRI.A.CHANDRA BABU

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695014.

¶12

2 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE, MANNACHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673573.

¶13

3 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THAMARASSERRY P.O., KOZHIKODE-673573

¶14

4 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUNNAMANGALAM P.O., KOZHIKKODE-673571

¶15

5 THE MANAGER, A.L.P.SCHOOL, POLUR, KONOTT P.O., KUNNAMANGALAM, KOZHIKKODE-673571.

¶16

6 ADDL.R6.SARITHA.D, AGED 50 YEARS, W/O.LATE SATHYENDRAN, KOMOTTUCHALIL HOUSE, KONOTT P.O., KOZHIKKODE - 673571.

¶17

ADDL. R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 29.09.2021 IN IA NO.2/2021 IN WPC NO. 14458/2019.

¶18

BY ADVS.

¶19

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019

¶20

¶21

SRI.DIPU.R SRI.SANAL P.RAJ SMT. DEVI KRIPA R. SMT.DHANYA BABU SMT.P.A.PRIYA SRI.K.S.BAIJU

¶22

SMT NISHA BOSE SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.10.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).8065/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019 3

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶28

MONDAY, THE 11^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 19TH ASWINA, 1943

¶29

WP(C) NO. 8065 OF 2019

¶30

PETITIONERS:

¶31

1 V.SAROJINI AGED 83 YEARS W/O.GOPALAN, MANAGER, AIDED LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL (ALPS), POLUR, KONOTT.P.O., KOZHIKODE-673571. (DIED) AND RESIDING AT VATTIMUNDA HOUSE, KONOTT.P.O., KOZHIKODE-673571.

¶32

2 ADDL.P2. SARITHA.D. AGED 50 YEARS W/O.LATE SATHYENDRAN, KOMOTTUCHALIL HOUSE, KONOTT P.O., KOZHIKODU-673 571. ADDITIONAL PETITIONER IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 05-10-2021 IN IA 1/2021.

¶33

BY ADVS. DIPU.R K.S.BAIJU DEVI KRIPA R. DHANYA BABU P.A.PRIYA

¶34

RESPONDENTS:

¶35

1 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (DDE),KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MANNANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶36

2 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER (DEO), THAMARASSERY, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THAMARASSERY.P.O., KOZHIKODE-673573.

¶37

3 ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER (AEO), KUNNAMANGALAM, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUNNAMANGALAM.P.O., KOZHIKODE-673571.

¶38

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019

¶39

¶40

4 K SANALKUMARI, HEADMISTRESS, AIDED LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL (ALPS), POLUR, KONOTT.P.O., KOZHIKODE-673571.

¶41

BY ADVS. SRI.B.KRISHNA KUMAR SRI.A.CHANDRA BABU

¶42

SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶43

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.10.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).14458/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶44

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019

¶45

¶46

JUDGMENT

¶47

In view of the commonality of issues involved W.P (C).No.14458 /2019

¶48

and W.P.(C) No.8065/2019 are taken up and disposed of by a common judgment.

¶49

The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.14458/2019 states that she joined service in the ALP school, Polur on 23.7.1984 and continued as a teacher till 1.6.2008 on which day, she was promoted to the post of Headmistress. It is contended that the petitioner was placed under suspension by the Manager for various periods and these orders were interfered with by the official respondents. The official respondents permitted the petitioner to continue as Headmistress till she attained superannuation on 30.4.2019. The petitioner contends that the period of suspension has not been regularised to date by the Manager.

¶50

W.P.(C) No. 8065/2019 is filed by the Manager of the ALP School, Polur contending that disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the Headmistress (Petitioner in W.P(C).No.14458/2019) which culminated in the issuance of the order dated 11.5.2015 as per which, the Headmistress was reverted to the post of LPSA with permanent effect. However, the approval

¶51

was rejected by the AEO. Challenging the said order, Ext.P14 appeal was preferred before the DDE. The limited prayer in the writ petition is for

¶52

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019

¶53

¶54

expeditious consideration of the appeal.

¶55

The controversy in these writ petitions revolves around an undertaking alleged to have been given by the Manager on 26.11.2018 in the course of the hearing of the appeal preferred by the Manager.

¶56

The Headmistress asserts that the Manager undertook that she shall regularise the period of suspension within a period of one week. When the 5th respondent did not comply with the undertaking, Ext.P1 was issued by the DDE, directing compliance or to face action in accordance with the provisions of Chapter III of the KER. It is contended that when the direction issued by the 2nd respondent was not heeded, the Headmistress is stated to have submitted Exts.P2 and P3 representations before the DDE and the Manager. Complaining of inaction, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.14458/2019 is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:

¶57

a) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction directing the 5th respondent to act upon Ext.P1 in a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

¶58

b) to issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, direction, order directing the respondents to take immediate action on Exts.P2 and P3 in a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

¶59

c) to issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, direction, order, directing the respondents to regularise the period of suspension of the petitioner and allow all revised increment arrears from 2012 onwards and all revised arrears of wages from the year 2014 onwards with interest in a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court

¶60

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019

¶61

¶62

The relief sought for in W.P. (C) 8065 of 2019 are as follows

¶63

i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders in Exhibit P14 appeal based on the hearing conducted on 26.11.2018 within a week

¶64

ii) quash Exhibit P17 by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other writ order or direction.

¶65

An application for impleadment was filed by Smt.Saritha D., the daughter-in-law of the 5th respondent in W.P(C) No.14458/2019. In the application, it has been stated that the 5th respondent is no more and the applicant has been elected as the new Manager by the General Body of the legal heirs. The said application was allowed and the applicant was impleaded as additional 6th respondent.

¶66

I have heard Sri. Nemom Chandrababu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner who submitted that there is no justification on the part of the 5th respondent in not complying with the undertaking given by her before the 2nd respondent. It is further submitted that in view of the passing away of the 5th respondent, the petitioner would be satisfied if the 2nd respondent is directed to ensure that the undertaking given by the former Manager is honoured by the present Manager.

¶67

Sri.Dipu. R., the learned counsel who appeared for the present manager submitted that the former manager has filed W.P.(C) No. 8065/2019 seeking directions to the 1st respondent to pass expeditious orders on the

¶68

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019

¶69

¶70

appeal preferred by the former Manager challenging order dated 30.1.2018 by which the AEO, Kunnamangalam had declined to approve the order passed by the Manager reverting the petitioner herein from the post of Headmistress to LPSA with permanent effect. It is submitted that in the writ petition it was asserted that the former Manager had not signed any undertaking as contended by the petitioner in the instant writ petition. It is submitted that since the appeal is pending consideration of the DDE, the said respondent be directed to consider the same and dispose it of in an expeditious manner.

¶71

10. I have considered the submissions advanced. The teacher asserts

¶72

that the former Manager who is now no more had given an undertaking before the DDE that she shall regularise the period of suspension of the petitioner. This order was passed while hearing the appeal filed by the Manager. The 5th respondent is no more. Records reveal that prior to her death, she had approached this Court and had filed W.P.(C) No.8065/2019 seeking directions to the DDE to expedite the hearing of the appeal. In the peculiar facts and circumstances and in view of the passing away of the Manager who had given the undertaking, I am of the view that interest of justice would be served if the 2nd respondent is directed to hear the appeal along with Ext.P2 representation submitted by the petitioner before the said authority.

¶73

Resultantly, there will be a direction to the DDE, before whom the Appeal preferred by the Manager is pending to take the same up and pass

¶74

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019

¶75

¶76

appropriate orders, as per procedure and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the teacher as well as the Manager. While hearing the appeal, the representation filed by the teacher shall also be considered. Orders shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period

¶77

of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶78

These writ petitions are disposed of.

¶79

Sd/-

¶80

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶81

JUDGE

¶82

¶83

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019

¶84

¶85

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8065/2019

¶86

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶87

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER WITH
	NO.B2/22031/2013(1) DATED 5.2.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WITH NO.AS 5/2016 DATED 18.2.2016 ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER WITH NO.AS.5/2016(1) DATED 14.3.2016 ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER WITH NO.AS.5/2016 DATED 14.3.2016 ISSUED TO LPSA, SUJATHA.K.P.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WITH NO.AS.5/2016 DATED 14.3.2016 ISSUED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WITH NO.AS.5/2016 DATED 14.3.2016 ISSUED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WITH NO.AS.5/2016, DATED 14.3.2016 ADDRESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER WITH NO.D/696/2015 DATED 28.3.2016.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES ALONG WITH STATEMENT OF ALLEGATION WITH NO.AS.5/2017 DATED 16.3.2017 ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER WITH NO.D/696/2015, DATED 9.3.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER WITH NO.AS.27/2013 DATED 11.5.2015 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WITH NO.AS.27/2013

¶88

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019

¶89

¶90

DATED 11.5.2015 ADDRESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶91

EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER WITH NO.D.696/2017 DATED 30.1.2018. EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 16.2.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE HEARING NOTICE WITH NO.B2/24356/12, DATED 8.11.2018. EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE SUBMITTED BEOFRE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION WITH NO.B2/24356/2012 DATED 22.2.2019. EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 9.3.2019 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P19 THE TRUE COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE IN FORM NO.6, DATED 11/06/2020 ISSUED BY THE KOZHIKKODE CORPORATION EXHIBIT P20 THE TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P21 THE TRUE COPY OF CONSENT LETTER RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶92

NIL

¶93

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019 12

¶94

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14458/2019

¶95

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶96

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.02.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶97

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16.03.2019.

¶98

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 16.03.2019.

¶99

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶100

EXHIBIT R5(A) TRUE COPY OF ORDER WITH NO.A5 5/2016(1) DATED 14.03.2016 EXHIBIT R5(B) TRUE COPY OF ORDER WITH NO.B2/22031/2013(1) DATED 5.2.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R5(C) TRUE COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WITH NO.AS 5/2016 DATED 18.2.2016 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT R5(D) TRUE COPY OF ORDER WITH NO.AS 5/2016 DATED 14.3.2016 EXHIBIT R5(E) TRUE COPY OF ORDER WITH NO.D/696/2015 DATED 28.3.2016 EXHIBIT R5(F) TRUE COPY OF ORDER WITH NO.D/696/2015 DATED 9.3.2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R5(G) TRUE COPY OF ORDER WITH NO.AS 27/2013 DATED 11.5.2015 ISSUED BY THIS RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R5(H) TRUE COPY OF ORDER WITH NO.D696/2017 DATED 30.1.2018 EXHIBIT R5(I) TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 16.2.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R5(J) TRUE COPY OF COMMON JUDGMENT DATED

¶101

WP(C) NOs.14458 & 8065 OF 2019 13

¶102

7.4.2014 IN W.P.(C)NO.44 OF 2014 AND W.P. (C). 5432/2014

¶103

EXHIBIT R5(K) TRUE COPY OF ORDER WITH NO.K.DC:B2/9015/2012 DATED 25.3.2019 EXHIBIT R5(L) TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 17.5.2019 EXHIBIT R6(A) THE TRUE COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE IN FORM NO.6 DATED 11/06/2020 ISSUED BY THE KOZHIKKODU CORPORATION

Sanalkumari K. v. the Director of Public Instructions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanalkumari K. v. the Director of Public Instructions

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

Shimitha. C Vs Sugatha

Seena L.K., Vs State of Kerala

Rosh v. Kuriakose, Vs the Principal Secretary to Government

B.v.Sakeena Beevi by Power of Attorney Holder Rasheek Ahamed Vs Director of Public Instruction

R.Sujatha Vs the State of Kerala

V.Sarojini Vs the Deputy Director of Education (Dde),Kozhikode