Allowed

Lejeesh.P. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Nov 2022WP(C)/11857/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court held that refusal to sanction full scale of pay and regular appointment for office attendants/peons in uneconomic schools is illegal. The court directed respondents to grant approval with all consequential benefits.

What did the court decide?

To quash orders rejecting scale of pay; direct respondents to sanction regular full-time appointment with effect from dates of appointment and all consequential benefits.

Lejeesh.P. Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 11857 OF 2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 26TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶7

WP(C) NO. 11857 OF 2022

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

1 LEJEESH.P., OFFICE ATTENDANT/PEON, KUNHAMPARAMBA U.P.SCHOOL, CHIRAKKARA P.O., THALASSERY, KANNUR-670 104 RESIDING AT PONNAMBATH HOUSE, P.O.POOKKODE, PATHAYAKKUNNU,KANNUR-670 691.

¶10

2 JISHNU SUNIL.P.K., OFFICE ATTENDANT/PEON, ATHIRKAM U.P.SCHOOL, P.O MUNDAYAD, KANNUR-670 594, RESIDING AT POOVAKKATTU HOUSE, MYLLULYI, P.O.PATHIRIYAD, PINARAYI,KANNUR-670 741 3 JAREESH RAMAKRISHNAN.K.P., OFFICE ATTENDANT/PEON, EDACHOVVA U.P.SCHOOL, P.O.CHOVVA, KANNUR-670 006, RESIDING AT SREE PADMAM, IRIVERI, P.O.MOWANCHERI, KANNUR-670 613

¶11

BY ADVS. M.R.ANISON V.BHARGAVI (PANANGAD) P.A.RINUSA

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

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

¶14

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCTION, JAGATHY,

¶15

WP(C) NO. 11857 OF 2022 2

¶16

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014

¶17

3 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KANNUR NORTH, KANNUR-670 002

¶18

4 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, POCHIRAKKARA, TELLICHERRY SOUTH, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 104 BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA

¶19

SMT. ANIMA, GP

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C) NO. 11857 OF 2022

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Being aggrieved by the refusal on the part of respondents 2 to 4 in passing orders approving the petitioners’ appointment as Office Attendant/Peon, based on a scale of pay attached to the aforesaid posts and for incidental reliefs, the petitioners have approached this Court with this writ petition.

¶25

The petitioners contend that they were appointed as Office Attendants/Peons in various UP Schools. The 1st petitioner was appointed with effect from 02.03.2015, the 2nd petitioner was appointed with effect from 29.06.2015, and the 3rd petitioner was appointed with effect from 16.09.2019 as per Exts.P1 to P3 orders. According to the petitioners, the requests made by the manager for sanctioning the full scale of pay attached to Office Attendant/Peon were rejected by Exts.P4 to P6 orders on the sole ground that the school is uneconomic.

¶26

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the issue raised in this writ petition is covered by the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.1358 of 2021 and connected cases, a copy of the same is produced as Ext.P8. According to the learned counsel, Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules mandates that the post of Peon

¶27

WP(C) NO. 11857 OF 2022 4

¶28

in every school is mandatory whether or not there are sufficient students.

¶29

I have heard Smt.Rinusa, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt. Anima M., the learned Government Pleader.

¶30

There is no dispute that as per the staff fixation order in respect of the School in which the petitioners are working, there is only one post of Office/Attendant/Peon. The only reason stated by the official respondents to decline the sanctioning of pay and other allowances attached to the post is that the School in which the petitioners are working is uneconomic. This Court in Exhibits P7 and P8, have held that unlike in the case of teaching staff, the provisions of Chapter XXIV B, read with Chapter XXIV A of the KER, mandate that in every Upper Primary School, there can be appointed in the non-teaching establishment of such school, one Peon (subsequently redesignated as Office Attendant). The posts of Peon/Office Attendant were not such as were likely to be abolished in any staff fixation since the post itself is one that is statutorily envisaged irrespective of the student strength in the school concerned. The Division Bench went on to hold that the stand of the Educational Authorities/Government that the post of Peon/Office Attendant in aided uneconomic U.P. Schools can be filled only on a daily wage basis to be legally unsustainable. So long as there is a vacancy to an established post of

¶31

WP(C) NO. 11857 OF 2022 5

¶32

Peon/Office Attendant, and the post is not likely to be abolished in any staff fixation conducted in the school, the appointments made to the post have to be approved on a regular scale of pay and not on a daily wage basis. In view of the law laid down by the Division Bench, the petitioners are entitled to succeed.

¶33

In view of the discussion above, Exts.P2 and P4 to P6 orders will stand quashed to the extent that the respondents have not sanctioned the scale of pay attached to Office Attendant/Peon. There will be a direction to the competent among respondents 2 to 4 to reconsider the matter in light of the law laid down in Exts.P7, P8 and P9 and grant approval to the appointment of the petitioners as full-time office attendant on a regular pay basis with effect from their respective dates of appointment with all consequential benefits. Orders shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶34

This Writ petition is disposed of.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

¶39

WP(C) NO. 11857 OF 2022

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11857/2022

¶42

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :

¶43

Exhibit P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 02.03.2015
Exhibit P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 29.06.2015
Exhibit P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 16.09.2019
Exhibit P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.04.2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT, REJECTING SCALE OF PAY TO 1ST PETITIONER
Exhibit P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.G4/81022/2018/DPI/K.DIS DATED 23.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, REJECTING SCALE OF PAY TO 1ST PETITIONER
Exhibit P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE ODER BEARING NO.B/1427/19(2) DATED 11.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT REJECTING SCALE OF PAY TO 3RD PETITIONER
Exhibit P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.03.2021 IN WPC NO.29514/2018
Exhibit P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.11.2021 AND WA NO.1346/2021
Exhibit P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2021 IN RP NO.915/2021
Exhibit P10	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING GO.(RT) NO.1386/2022/GEDN DATED 07.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT, SANCTIONING SCALE OF PAY TO PETITIONERS IN W.P.(C) NO.29514/2018

Lejeesh.P. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lejeesh.P. 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

The Thanbeehul Islam Higher Secondary School Vs State of Kerala

Biji Venugopal, Vs State of Kerala

R.Moorthy Vs State of Kerala

Alphonsa Ancy Vs Director of General Education

Shemeera v. Vs State of Kerala

Karmela Rani Training College Vs the University of Kerala