Disposed

Corporate Educational Agency Mary Matha Province Angamaly v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Jun 2021WP(C)/6875/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought approval of their appointment as LPST and UPST in selected schools and payment of dues. The court held that respondents must consider the proposal and pass approval orders within two months, noting the previous judgment directed such consideration.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 5th respondent to pass orders on the approval of the petitioner's appointment for the academic years 2014-15 and 2015-16 onwards within two months.

Corporate Educational Agency Mary Matha Province… — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 6875 OF 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶6

MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 31ST JYAISHTA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 6875 OF 2021

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

1 CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY MARY MATHA PROVINCE ANGAMALY REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, SMT. PRASANNA, AGED 59 YEARS, D/O. OUSEPH, KALLARACKAL HOUSE, MOOKKANNOOR,

¶9

P A SHINU, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O.P.A ANTONY, PULICKAL HOUSE,

¶10

2 MAMBRA LPST OLPH UPS EDAKKUNNU ANGAMALY

¶11

BY ADV T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

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

¶14

2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014.

¶15

3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011.

¶16

4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER ALUVA, PIN - 683101.

¶17

5 ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER ANGAMALY, PIN - 683572.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C) NO. 6875 OF 2021

¶20

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶23

To call for the records relating to Exhibits P1 to P8 and to issue

¶24

writ of mandamus commanding the respondents 2, 3 and 5 to approve the appointment of the 2^nd petitioner as LPST commencing from the year 2015-16, 16-17, 17-18 in OLPHUPS Edakunnu and thereafter as LPST in St.Joseph’s LPS Karukutty from 1/6/2018 onwards by approving Ext.P7 appointment and P8 proceedings passed by the 1^st petitioner and also the appointment at St.Joseph’s LPS Karukutty from 1/6/2018 onwards as LPST and to pay full salary and other benefits due to the petitioners.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

¶26

Government Pleader.

¶27

It is submitted that the 1^st petitioner is the Manager of a Corporate Educational Agency and the 2^nd petitioner is a teacher who was appointed in one of the schools managed by the 1^st petitioner. The 2^nd petitioner was appointed as LPST in the academic year 2013-14. During the subsequent year 2014-15, there was a fall of an LP division. However, the 2^nd petitioner was retained as UPST. Thereafter, in the year 2015-16 there was a post of

¶28

WP(C) NO. 6875 OF 2021

¶29

¶30

LPST to accommodate the 2^nd petitioner and the 2^nd petitioner continued in service.

¶31

It is submitted that the initial appointment as LPST for the year 2013-14 was approved only in the year 2018. The retention of the 2^nd petitioner as UPST in the year 2014-15 was not approved on the ground that shifting was not permissible. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that by Ext.P4 judgment, the respondents had been directed to consider the claim of the 2^nd petitioner as a claimant under Rule 51A, Chapter XIV A KER and to consider the approval of appointment of the 2^nd petitioner for the academic year 2014-15 as UPST. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that though the appointment orders of the 2^nd petitioner as UPST for the academic year 2014-15 and again as LPST for the year 2015-16 onwards have been forwarded by the 1^st petitioner, the same has not been considered by the educational authorities concerned.

¶32

The learned Government Pleader submits, on instructions that the shifting of LPSTs and UPSTs inter se is not permissible and that fresh appointment orders would have to be issued before issue of approval can be

¶33

WP(C) NO. 6875 OF 2021

¶34

¶35

considered. It is further submitted that the question with regard to approval of appointment of the 2^nd petitioner as UPST for the year 2014-15 pursuant to Ext.P4 judgment is pending consideration and that the question of further appointment and approval as LPST for the year 2015-16 onwards will also be considered along with the issue of approval for the year 201415.

¶36

I notice that Ext.P4 judgment is dated 01.02.2021. The direction therein is for the 1^st petitioner to issue an appointment order to the 2^nd petitioner as UPST for the academic year 2014-15 and for the issue of approval to be considered by the 5^th respondent within one month from the date of receipt of the proposal. It is an admitted case that appointments have been made pursuant to the directions contained in Ext.P4 judgment and that the proposal has been sent up for approval. However, no orders appear to have been passed. In any view of the matter, the respondents are duty bound to comply with Ext.P4 judgment without further delay. Taking note of the pandemic situation and the lockdown imposed in the recent past, I refrain from making any further observations as to the delay.

¶37

WP(C) NO. 6875 OF 2021

¶38

¶39

In any view of the matter, the issue of approval of appointment as UPST for the year 2014-15 as well as the issue of approval as LPST for the year 2015-16 onwards shall be considered by the 5^th respondent without delay. Orders on the approval shall be passed within a period of two months from today.

¶40

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶43

SVP

¶44

WP(C) NO. 6875 OF 2021

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6875/2021

¶47

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

¶48

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF 2ND PETITIONER
DATED 3.6.2013.

¶49

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.31797/2019
DATED 25.11.2019.

¶50

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GO(RT).NO. 2290/2020/GEDN
OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 8.7.2020.

¶51

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 24400/2020
DATED 1.2.2021.

¶52

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 2177/2020 OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 26.06.2020.

¶53

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. F5/7848/2020/DPI
DATED 1.1.2021.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 15.7.2015
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶54

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 3.3.2021 BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT.

Corporate Educational Agency Mary Matha Province Angamaly v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Corporate Educational Agency Mary Matha Province Angamaly 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdunaseer P.P Vs T.K.Jose

Kala B.S Vs T.K.Jose, IAS

Dr.K.Subramanya Bhat Vs Travancore and Cochin Medical Council

Santhosh K. N. Vs P. Gireesan

Manilal.K.K Vs the State of Kerala

Sreejith K.S, Vs the Apj Abdul Kalam Technological University