Partly allowed

Sheeba P.P. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Sept 2021WP(C)/16508/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala issued directions to the State of Kerala to expeditiously consider the petitioner's representation regarding her appointment as a teacher, allowing the authority to deem the required bond as executed within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation within three months and to deem the Manager to have executed the bond.

Sheeba P.P. Vs State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 16508 OF 2021 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 2ND ASWINA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 16508 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SHEEBA P.P., AGED 50 YEARS, U.P.SCHOOL TEACHER, CHRIST RAJ HIGH SCHOOL KUTTIPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 524.

¶8

BY ADVS. P.M.PAREETH M.K.MEHRUNISHA BASIMA

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶11

2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.

¶12

3 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ALUVA, P.O.ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 101.

¶13

4 MANAGER, CHRIST RAJ HIGH SCHOOL KUTTIPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 524.

¶14

5 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM - 682 030.

¶15

SMT NISHA BOSE, SR GP

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C) NO. 16508 OF 2021

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner states that she is working as Upper Primary School Teacher at the Christ Raj High School, Kuttipuzha, an aided school under the management of the 4th respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that the approval of appointment of the petitioner as UPST for the period from 04.07.2007 to 31.05.2011 was rejected and the approval was limited from 01.06.2011. The petitioner contends that the sole ground on the basis of which approval was rejected is that the Manager had not executed bond as per G.O.(P) No.10/10/G.Edn. dated 12.1.2010. The petitioner contends that in the light of the judgment of this Court in State of Kerala v. Rajimohan [W.A. No.332 of 2017] and connected cases], the appointment has to be approved by treating that the Manager has executed the bond. Stating all these aspects, Ext.P6 representation has been submitted by the petitioner before the 1st respondent. The request of the petitioner is for expeditious consideration of Ext.P6 within a time frame.

¶21

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. In view of the nature of relief that I propose to pass, notice to the 4th respondent is dispensed with.

¶22

After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:

¶23

WP(C) NO. 16508 OF 2021 3

¶24

a) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the assertions made in

¶25

the representation there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to

¶26

take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorised representative as well as the 4th respondent.

¶27

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶28

c) It is made clear that it would be open to the 1st respondent to deem that the Manager had executed the bond as stipulated in G.O.(P) No.10/10/G.Edn. dated 12.1.2010.

¶29

d) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent for further action.

¶30

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

¶33

¶34

WP(C) NO. 16508 OF 2021 4

¶35

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16508/2021

¶36

PETITIONER (S) EXHIBITS :

¶37

Exhibit P1	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 04/07/2007 IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONER CONTAINING ENDORSEMENT BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT APPROVING APPOINTMENT FROM 01/06/2011.
Exhibit P2	A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B2/5533/07/K.DIS. DATED 15/12/2007 ISSUED BY THIRD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.K.DIS/B3- 1304/08 DATED 04/02/2008 ISSUED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4	A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER NO.RA(2)/76618/07/DPI/K.DIS. DATED 27/05/2008 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.75804/L3/08/G.EDN. DATED 25/12/2008 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04/08/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

¶38

RESPONDENT (S) EXHIBITS : NIL

Sheeba P.P. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheeba P.P. v. 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

Fr. Joseph E.J., Vs the State of Kerala

Fr. Somy Mathew Vs the State of Kerala

P.Muhammed Shafi Vs the State of Kerala

Seena P. Vs Government of Kerala

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Indira S., Vs State of Kerala