Allowed

Mithun Kumar.C v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Jan 2021WP(C)/449/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the State to consider revision petitions of four teachers at Kuthuparamba High School, deeming execution of a required manager bond. The court ordered approval of appointments and disbursement of monetary benefits within specified timelines.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to pass appropriate orders on revision petitions P16 to P19 within three months, deeming bond furnished; monetary benefits to be disbursed thereafter.

Mithun Kumar.C Vs State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 17TH POUSHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.449 OF 2021(E)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1 MITHUN KUMAR.C AGED 38 YEARS HST (MATHS), KUTHUPARAMBA HIGH SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 643

¶8

2 SINDHU P.V. HST (P.S), KUTHUPARAMBA HIGH SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 643

¶9

3 SHIBINA P. UPST, KUTHUPARAMBA HIGH SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 643

¶10

4 SITHARA S. UPST, KUTHUPARAMBA HIGH SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 643

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.POOVAMULLE PARAMBIL ABDULKAREEM

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

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

¶14

2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014

¶15

3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR 670 001

¶16

4 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 101

¶17

5 MANAGER KUTHUPARAMBA HIGH SCHOOL, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 643

¶18

WP(C).No.449 OF 2021(E)

¶19

¶20

OTHER PRESENT:

¶21

GP- SMT. NISHA BOSE

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C).No.449 OF 2021(E)

¶24

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

Dated this the 7th day of January 2021

¶27

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:

¶28

“(i) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction directing the 1^st respondent to consider and pass final orders on Exts.P16 to P19 revision petitions as expeditiously as possible with deeming provision.

¶29

ii) to issue a writ of certiorari to set aside denail of approval in Exts.P1, P5, P8 and P10 as it is illegal and unjustifiable.

¶30

iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 5^th respondent to approve the appointment of the 1^st petitioner as UPSA from 23.7.2007 to 31.5.2011, from 21.6.2007 to 31.5.2011 as HST (P.S) of the 2^nd petitioner, and from 1.6.2009 to 31.0.2011 as UPSA, and from 1.7.2009 to 31.0.2011 as UPSA and to disburse all consequential monitory benefits due to them forth with.

¶31

iv) To declare that the petitioners are entitled to get approval to their respective posts in the light of Ext.P15 judgment.

¶32

WP(C).No.449 OF 2021(E)

¶33

¶34

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶35

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondents have refused to approve the appointment of the petitioner with effect from the initial date of appointment on the ground that the Manager has not executed a bond in terms of G.O. (P).No.10/10/G.Edn. dated 12.1.2010. The petitioners have preferred Exts.P16 to P19 revision petitions before the Government. It is submitted that, by several judgments including Ext.P15 judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, this Court has directed the approval of appointment with effect from the initial date of appointment, deeming that the bond has been executed by the Manager. It is therefore, contended that Exts.P16 to P19 are to be considered by the Government, taking note of the deemed submission of bond by the Manager. and direct the approval of appointment with effect from the initial date of appointment.

¶36

Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1^st respondent to take up and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P16 to P19 revision petitions, deeming that the bond has been furnished by the Manager as

¶37

WP(C).No.449 OF 2021(E)

¶38

¶39

provided in G.O.(P).No.10/10/G.Edn. Dated 12.1.2010. Appropriate orders shall be passed on Exts.P16 to P19, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Monetary benefits, if any found due, shall be calculated and disbursed to the petitioner within a period of three months thereafter.

¶40

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/

ANU SIVARAMAN

JUDGE

Jm/

WP(C).No.449 OF 2021(E)

¶46

¶47

APPENDIX

¶48

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶49

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 23/7/2007 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B6/7525/07/K.DIS DATED 11/2/2008 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.EM(3)/59141/2008/DPI/D.DIS DATED 29/12/2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1/6/2011 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 21/6/2007 THUS ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.B6/6239/07/K.DIS DATED 18/1/2008 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.EM(3)/42320/2008/DPI/D.DIS DATED 23/10/2008 THUS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1/6/2009 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K.DIS/B6/4411/09 DATED 27.6.2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1/7/2009 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K.DIS/B6/5204/10 DATED 29/6/2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EM4/15979/2011/DPI/K.DIS DATED 6.8.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P13	TRUE COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL STAFF FIXATION

¶50

WP(C).No.449 OF 2021(E)

¶51

¶52

	ORDERS FOR THE YE 2009-10 ISSUED BY	ARS 2007-08, 2008-09 AND THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P14	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 25.10.2011 RESPONDENT	LETTER NO.60930/J2/G.EDN. ISSUED BY THE 1ST
EXHIBIT P15	TRUE COPY OF THE IN W.A.NO.2592/20 COURT	JUDGMENT DATED 26/7/2017 15 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE
EXHIBIT P16	TRUE COPY OF THE 12/3/2020 THUS SU PETITIONER BEFORE	REVISION PETITION DATED BMITTED BY THE 1ST THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P17	TRUE COPY OF THE 12/3/2020 THUS SU PETITIONER BEFORE	REVISION PETITION DATED BMITTED BY THE 2ND THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P18	TRUE COPY OF THE 12/3/2020 THUS SU PETITIONER BEFORE	REVISION PETITION DATED BMITTED BY THE 3RD THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P19	TRUE COPY OF THE 12/3/2020 THUS SU PETITIONER BEFORE	REVISION PETITION DATED BMITTED BY THE 4TH THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P20	TRUE COPY OF THE NO.B6/4954/19/K.D BY THE 4TH RESPON	PROCEEDINGS IS DATED 22/02/2020 ISSUED DENT

Mithun Kumar.C v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithun Kumar.C 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

Jyothishkumaar Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Vijesh O.G. Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

Sajeevan P. Vs State of Kerala

Mahendran T., Vs Fertilizers and Chemicals of Travancore Ltd.

Subha a., Vs the Director

Rasmi K.R. Vs the State of Kerala