Allowed

Anitha R.K. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Dec 2022WP(C)/11776/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition concerned the rejection of the petitioner's appointment approval as an Upper Primary School Teacher. The Court held that the impugned Government Order was not applicable to aided schools, relying on judicial precedent. The order rejecting appointment was quashed, and the school manager was directed to process the appointment within three months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed. Direction to 4th respondent to grant appointment approval and all consequential benefits within three months.

Anitha R.K. Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 11776 OF 2020

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶7

WP(C) NO. 11776 OF 2020

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

ANITHA R.K. AGED 35 YEARS W/O MANIKANDAN V, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHER, P.S.A UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, KIZHATTUR, MALAPPURAM-679 325.

¶10

BY ADVS. K.JAJU BABU (SR.) SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

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

¶13

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶14

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM-676 505.

¶15

4 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MELATTUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 326.

¶16

WP(C) NO. 11776 OF 2020

¶17

¶18

5 THE MANAGER, P.S.A UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, KIZHATTUR, MALAPPURAM-679 325. BY ADVS. SRI.L.RAM MOHAN SMT. MARY BEENA JOSEPH, SR. GP

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C) NO. 11776 OF 2020

¶21

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The petitioner states that she was appointed as Upper Primary School

¶24

Assistant with effect from 18.07.2016 in a retirement vacancy as per Ext.P1 order. However, the approval was rejected by Ext.P2 order on the ground that

¶25

the retirement vacancy, which was kept unfilled for more than one year, would cease to exist. Though the manager preferred an appeal before the DEO, the

¶26

same was also rejected. The petitioner contends that the 4th respondent has

¶27

now issued Ext.P4 order stating that the approval of appointment can be approved only after disposal of the Writ Appeal No.2321/2017, pending before

¶28

this Court. The petitioner contends that the said order cannot be sustained.

¶29

The petitioner asserts that the stand taken by the respondents while

¶30

issuing Exts.P2, P3, and P4 cannot be sustained in view of Ext.P5 order issued

¶31

by the Government wherein it has been held that the post will not cease to

¶32

exist on expiry of one year even if it is not filled up. The petitioner states that

¶33

WP(C) NO. 11776 OF 2020

¶34

¶35

later she has been granted approval with effect from 12.06.2018 by Ext.P6 order. Being aggrieved by the non-grant of approval with effect from 18.07.2016 to 11.06.2018, the petitioner is before this Court seeking directions.

¶36

Sri. Brijesh Mohan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would refer to Ext.P2, and it is submitted that the only reason stated therein is based on G.O.(P) No.1201/2001 Fin. dated 22.10.2001. It is also pointed out that a Division Bench of this Court in State of Kerala and others Vs. Jayan and others [2009 (3) KLT 857] have taken the view that the said Government

¶37

Order would not apply to aided schools and, therefore, the order issued by

¶38

the respondents cannot be sustained under law. It is also submitted that the same view was taken by the Government while issuing Ext.P5 order, and it

¶39

was held that in view of the law laid down in Jayan (supra), the petitioner

¶40

therein is entitled to succeed.

¶41

Heard the learned Government Pleader, and I have considered the

¶42

submissions advanced.

¶43

WP(C) NO. 11776 OF 2020

¶44

¶45

As rightly submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the

¶46

petitioner, Ext.P2 is based on the Government Order, which was found to be

¶47

not applicable to aided schools. The same view was taken in Ext.P5 as well.

¶48

In that view of the matter Ext.P2 cannot be sustained under law, and the

¶49

same is quashed. There will be a direction to the 4th respondent to consider

¶50

the matter and grant approval of the appointment of the petitioner in terms

¶51

of Ext.P1. All consequential benefits shall be disbursed to the petitioner. The

¶52

above exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the

¶53

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶54

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶57

JUDGE

¶58

¶59

WP(C) NO. 11776 OF 2020

¶60

¶61

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11776/2020

¶62

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :

¶63

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 18.7.2016 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO K.DIS C/1929/16 DATED 31.3.2017 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF 2435/2018/G.EDN DATED 28.6.2018 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO C/287/2019 DATED 14.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF GO(RT) NO 5467/2018/G.EDN DATED 29.12.2018 ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 12.6.2018 AND APPROVAL ORDER NO K.DIS C/1210/2018 DATED 30.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT

¶64

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL

Anitha R.K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anitha R.K. 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

Super Industries Vs the State of Kerala

The Manager, A.U.P. School, Vadakkepotta Alathur, Vs State of Kerala

The Manager Aup School Pallikkal(Pallam), Vs State of Kerala

Fousiya K Vs State of Kerala

Azif Azad Vs Union of India

Nizar a. Vs State of Kerala