Partly allowed

A.Sari Antony v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Jan 2021WP(C)/1762/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside an impugned Government order that rejected a teacher's claim for appointment approval and pay regularization date of 2007. The judgment directed the Government to reconsider the claim in light of final judgments fixing the date as 2007 and afford an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

What did the court decide?

The impugned Government order dated 13.6.2018 (Ext.P9) is set aside and the Government is directed to reconsider the petitioner's claim specifically in terms of Exts.P5 and P5(a) judgments.

A.Sari Antony Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 5TH MAGHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.40745 OF 2018(P)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

A.SARI ANTONY AGED 39 YEARS

¶8

WIFE OF JOSEPH JOHN, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, C.M.UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, THOZHIYOOR, CHAVAKKAD EDUCATIONAL SUB DISTRICT, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.

¶10

SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.M.SAJJAD

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

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

¶13

2 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶14

3 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680506.

¶15

4 THE CORPORATE MANAGER, MALABAR INDEPENDENT SYRIAN CHURCH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, THOZHIYUR-680520, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶16

5 THE HEADMISTRESS, C.M.UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, THOZHIYOOR, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680520.

¶17

R1-3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶18

SRI. SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE (GP)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25.01.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).1762/2019(U), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C)Nos.40745/2018 & 1762/2019

¶21

¶22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶23

PRESENT

¶24

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶25

MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 5TH MAGHA, 1942

¶26

WP(C).No.1762 OF 2019(U)

¶27

PETITIONER:

¶28

A.SARI ANTONY AGED 39 YEARS WIFE OF JOSEPH JOHN, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, C.M. UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, THOZHIYOOR, CHAVAKKAD EDUCATIONAL SUB DISTRICT, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶29

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

¶30

RESPONDENTS:

¶31

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

¶32

2 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014

¶33

3 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 506

¶34

4 THE CORPORATE MANAGER MALABAR INDEPENDENT SYRIAN CHURCH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, THOZHIYUR-680 520, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶35

5 THE HEADMISTRESS

¶36

C.M. UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, THOZHIYOOR, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 520

¶37

R1-3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶38

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25.01.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).40745/2018(P), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶39

WP(C)Nos.40745/2018 & 1762/2019

¶40

¶41

JUDGMENT

¶42

The petitioner, who is stated to be

¶43

working as an Upper Primary School Teacher in

¶44

the services of C.M.Upper Primary School, Thozhiyoor, Thrissur - of which the 4^th respondent is the Corporate Manager - has filed both these writ petitions seeking corollary reliefs and I, therefore, dispose of the same together.

¶45

As per the petitioner, she was a

¶46

Rule 51A claimant under the Kerala Education Rules (KER for short) and was granted reappointment on 01/06/2007, as is evident from Ext.P4 order in both these cases. She says that though her appointment was directed to be approved, through Ext.P5 judgment, by this Court - which was confirmed by Ext.P5(a) judgment of a learned Division Bench - she was granted such benefit only with effect

¶47

from 01/06/2011, by including her in the 'Teachers Package'.

¶48

WP(C)Nos.40745/2018 & 1762/2019

¶49

¶50

The petitioner asserts that as long

¶51

as Exts.P5 and P5(a) judgments are in force, she is entitled to get salary from 01/06/2007 and not from 01/06/2011; and asserts that Government has virtually undone her right accrued from the year 2005, by issuing Ext.P9 order in W.P(C)N.1762 of 2019.

¶52

The petitioner contends that Ext.P9

¶53

order is illegal, since she was appointed from 28/10/2005 against a regular post, which

¶54

was approved through the Government Order produced as Ext.P1 in W.P(C)No.1762 of 2019.

¶55

The petitioner further says that as

¶56

per Exts.P5 and P5(a) judgments, her

¶57

approval had been directed to be granted with effect from 01/06/2007, but that she has been given such benefit only from 01/06/2011; and

¶58

therefore, prays that both these writ

¶59

petitions be allowed and the Government be directed to approve her appointment with

¶60

effect from 01/06/2007, thus leading to the

¶61

WP(C)Nos.40745/2018 & 1762/2019

¶62

¶63

grant of pay and allowances from that date.

¶64

The petitioner substantiates her

¶65

plea relying on Ext.P8(a) judgment, produced along with W.P(C)N.40745 of 2018, whereby, another learned Judge of this Court had directed the Government to consider her statutory revision for these benefits; and asserts that in spite of this, it has been rejected through Ext.P9 order in W.P(C)No.1762 of 2019.

¶66

counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, Shri.Sunil Kumar

¶67

Kuriakose, appearing for the official respondents.

¶68

submits that Ext.P9 in W.P(C)No.1762 of 2019 cannot be faulted, since Government has considered all the relevant aspects and have found that the petitioner is not entitled to be approved with effect from 01/06/2007 but

¶69

WP(C)Nos.40745/2018 & 1762/2019

¶70

¶71

only from 01/06/2011, by including her in the

¶72

'Teachers Package'. He, therefore, prays that

¶73

these writ petitions be dismissed.

¶74

When I consider the afore

¶75

submissions, it is indubitable that Exts.P5 and P5(a) judgments have now become final; and obviously, therefore, Government was bound to consider its impact before Ext.P9 order in W.P(C)No.1762 of 2019 could have been issued.

¶76

However, even on a close reading of

¶77

the said order, it does not show that any such consideration has been properly made and the petitioner's approval has been rejected with effect from 01/06/2007, saying that she is entitled only to be approved with effect from 01/06/2011, by including her in the 'Teachers Package'.

¶78

Though there are several reasons this Court can point out why Ext.P9 cannot be approved, I propose not to record them in

¶79

¶80

¶81

this judgment, so that Government can

¶82

reconsider the matter, taking specific note of the directions in Exts.P5 and P5(a) judgments, since specific declarations have already been made therein in favour of the petitioner that she is entitled for approval based on Ext.P2 order of appointment produced therein.

¶83

Suffice to say, since the petitioner claims to be Rule 51A claimant under the KER, on account of an earlier approved service in the School Ext.P9 cannot find my favour and it is clear that these aspects have not been properly considered therein.

¶84

In the afore circumstances, I order these

¶85

writ petitions and set aside Ext.P9 in

¶86

¶87

petitioner specifically in terms of the directions in Exts.P5 and P5(a)judgments of this Court and after affording an opportunity

¶88

¶89

¶90

of being heard to her, as well as the Manager of the School – either physically or through video conferencing – thus culminating in an appropriate order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶91

Sd/-

¶92

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

MC/29.1.2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40745/2018

¶98

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶99

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 28.10.2005 AND APPROVAL THEREOF. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT.)NO.709/09/GE DATED 12.2.2009 OF THE GOVERNMENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 14.7.2006 AND APPROVAL THEREOF. EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 13.9.2006 AND APPROVAL THEREOF. EXHIBIT P3B TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 9.2.2007 AND APPROVAL THEREOF. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 1.7.2007 AND APPROVAL THEREOF. EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. (RT.)NO.5596/2011/G.EDN. DATED 15.12.2011 OF THE GOVERNMENT. EXHIBIT P4B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1-868/12/K.DIS. DATED 23.3.2012 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4C TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.H2/14582/2012/DPI DATED 3.10.2012 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4D TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.F-01/2007-08 DATED 1.6.2007 OF THE MANAGER. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.24758/2010-T DATED 8.2.2012. EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.783/2014 DATED 4.11.2014. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.22917/2012-L DATED 20.11.2012. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

¶100

¶101

¶102

NO.EC5/1337/2013/DPI/K.DIS. DATED 20.3.2013 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶103

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WPC.NO.8594/2013-Y DATED 1.4.2013. EXHIBIT P8A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.8594/2013DATED 9.2.2018. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GEDNB3/125/2018-G.EDN. DATED 13.6.2018 OF THE GOVERNMENT. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. (RT.)NO.4536/2018/G.EDN. DATED 1.11.2018 OF THE GOVERNMENT.

¶104

¶105

¶106

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1762/2019

¶107

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶108

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE 28.10.2005 AND A	APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED PPROVAL THEREOF.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 12.2.2009	G.O (RT) NO. 709/09/GE OF THE GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER DATED THEREOF.	APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 14.07.2006 AND APPROVAL
EXHIBIT P3A	TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER DATED THEREON.	APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 13.09.2006 AND APPROVAL
EXHIBIT P3B	TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER DATED THEREON.	APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 09.02.2007 AND APPROVAL
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER DATED THEREON.	APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 01.07.2007 AND APPROVAL
EXHIBIT P4A	TRUE COPY OF THE 5596/2011/G.EDN. GOVERNMENT.	G.O (RT) NO. DATED 15.12.2011 OF THE
EXHIBIT P4B	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 23.3.2012	ORDER NO. B1-868/12/K.DIS OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4C	TRUE COPY OF THE H2/14582/2012/DP 2ND RESPONDENT.	LETTER NO. I DATED 03.10.2012 OF THE
EXHIBIT P4D	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 01.06.2007	LETTER NO. F-01/2007-08 OF THE MANAGER.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE 24758/2010-T DAT	JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. ED 8.2.2012
EXHIBIT P5A	TRUE COPY OF THE 783/2014 DATED 0	JUDGMENT IN W.A. NO. 4.11.2014
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE 22917/2012-L DAT	JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. ED 20.11.2012
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE	ORDER NO.

¶109

¶110

¶111

EC5/1337/2013/DPI/K.DIS. DATED 20.3.2013 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶112

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN W.P.(C) NO. 8594/2013-Y DATED 01.04.2013 EXHIBIT P8A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 8594/2013 DATED 09.02.2018 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(RT) NO. 36/2019/G.EDN. DATED 04.01.2019 OF THE GOVERNMENT.

A.Sari Antony v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Sari Antony 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Divya Krishnan Vs the Food Corporation of India

C.C.Mini Vs the State of Kerala

P.K. Rajendran Nair Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

Manager. a.U.P.Shcool Vs State of Kerala

Guruvayur Kshetra Karmic Sangham(Bms), Vs State of Kerala

Sumi T.V. Vs State of Kerala