Disposed

H. Jawahar v. the Director of General Education

Kerala HC8 Jul 2021WP(C)/9195/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Director of Vocational Higher Secondary Education and the District Educational Officer to consider representations from the petitioner regarding school appointments with notice to the petitioner, the Manager, and other Managing Committee members, disposing of the writ petition accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents 2 and 3 to consider representations (Exts. P5 and P6) with notice to petitioner, 4th respondent, and Managing Committee members within two months.

H. Jawahar Vs the Director of General Education — 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 8^TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 9195 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONERS :-

¶7

H. JAWAHAR, AGED 60 YEARS S/O.A.M. HANEEF, CHAIRMAN, AKMVHSS, THADICADU P.O., RESIDING AT VARALAZHIKATHU VEEDU, KOLLAM DISTRICT-695 306.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.V.PREMCHAND SMT.SURYA MOHAN P.

¶9

RESPONDENTS :-

¶10

1 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GENERAL EDUCATIONAL DIRECTORATE, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶11

2 THE DIRECTOR, VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶12

3 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

¶13

PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695 306.

¶14

ADDL.4 THE MANAGER ABDUL KHADAR MEMORIAL VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, THADICADU P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 306.

¶15

(ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 20.04.2021 IN I.A.2/2021 IN WP(C)9195/2021.)

¶16

BY SMT.NISHA BOSE, SR.GP

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C) NO. 9195 OF 2021

¶19

-: 2 :-

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Dated this the 8th day of July, 2021

¶22

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

¶23

“1) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction or order directing respondents 1 & 2 to consider and pass appropriate order in Exhibit P4 & P5 representations forth with by taking into account the mandatory provisions of Clause 4, 5 and 10 of the Exhibit P1 Bye law.

¶24

1. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction or order directing the 3^rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate order in Exhibit P6 forth with.”

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶26

learned Government Pleader.

¶27

Though the 4^th respondent has been additionally impleaded as a respondent in this writ petition and notice was ordered to be taken out to the 4^th respondent, I notice that the service of notice on the 4^th respondent is not complete. However, in view of the directions being issued in this writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that service of notice on the 4^th respondent may not be essential.

¶28

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the Chairman of the Abdul Khadar Memorial Vocational

¶29

WP(C) NO. 9195 OF 2021

¶30

-: 3 :-

¶31

Higher Secondary School, Thadicadu. Ext.P1 is the approved bye law. It is submitted that the bye law specifically provides that all major decisions including development of the school, appointment, regularisation, termination, etc. have to be taken by the Board of Management consisting of nine members. It is submitted that by Ext.P3, the Board of Management had taken an emergency decision that the appointments made without informing the Board and without getting its approval are to be deprecated and therefore, a decision was taken to approach the educational authorities and to request them to require the Manager to produce the ratification by the Board while issues of approval of appointments are being considered. It is submitted that the present Manager is also a signatory to Ext.P3. Exts.P5 and P6 are the representations so preferred by the petitioner before the Director of Vocational Higher Secondary Education as well as the DEO. It is submitted that the said representations can be considered by the appropriate authorities with notice to the petitioner as well as the Manager.

¶32

The learned Government Pleader submits that there is likely to be some dispute with regard to Ext.P3 since it is signed only by four members of the Managing Committee.

¶33

WP(C) NO. 9195 OF 2021

¶34

-: 4 :-

¶35

Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion that the request made by the petitioner can be considered by the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents with notice to the petitioner as well as the 4^th respondent as also the other members of the Managing Committee.

¶36

The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of directing respondents 2 and 3 to take up, consider and pass orders on Exts.P5 and P6 representations with notice to the petitioner as well as the 4^th respondent and the other members of the Managing Committee as is revealed from Ext.P1. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this writ petition along with a copy of this judgment before respondents 2 and 3 for compliance. Orders shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶37

Sd/- ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶38

Jvt/8.7.2021

¶39

WP(C) NO. 9195 OF 2021

-: 5 :-

APPENDIX

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BYE LAW DATED 18/12/1985. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES BOOK DATED 10/06/2018. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION DATED 14/02/2021. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01/03/2021 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01/03/2021 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01/03/2021 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARDS REVEALING THE ACCEPTANCE OF EXHIBIT 4-6.

H. Jawahar v. the Director of General Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H. Jawahar v. the Director of General Education

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

Aswin Deep T. Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Martin G.D. Vs State of Kerala

Thejus Nandu S. Vs Kerala University of Health Sciences

P.Muralidharan Vs State of Kerala

Ershad C.M., Vs State of Kerala

Jagadheesh Kumar.R Vs Travancore Devaswom Board - Tdb