Disposed

Anwar Mohamed v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Oct 2022WP(C)/29504/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that merits could not be adjudicated due to a pending appeal. However, to prevent salary default, it ordered the petitioner to expedite the appeal within three months and permitted the 4th respondent to provisionally act as Drawing and Disbursing Officer until the appeal is decided.

What did the court decide?

i) Direction to 1st respondent to dispose of pending appeal within three months; ii) Interim permission to 4th respondent to act as Drawing and Disbursing Officer.

Anwar Mohamed Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 29504 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 13^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 21ST ASWINA, 1944

¶7

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

ANWAR MOHAMMED AGED 47 YEARS S/O MOHAMMED ALI, MANAGER, TKMRM VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VALLANA, ERUMAKKAD-P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 532 AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT IV A, PARTHENON APARTMENT, MAROTTICHUVAD ROAD, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-682 024.

¶10

BY ADV N.UNNIKRISHNAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

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

¶13

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, 5TH FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD COMPLEX, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶14

3 THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, CHENGANOOR- 689 121. 4 SMT. SREELEKHA, C., PRINCIPAL AND NON-VOCATIONAL TEACHER (COMMERCE), TKMRM VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VALLANA, ERUMAKKAD-P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA

¶15

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022 2

¶16

DISTRICT-689 532.

¶17

5 SRI SUNILKUMAR, P., VOCATIONAL TEACHER (OFFICE SECRETARYSHIP), TKMRM VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VALLANA, ERUMAKKAD-P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 532. BY ADVS. SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY N.SANTHA V.VARGHESE PETER JOSE CHRISTO S.A.ANAND K.N.REMYA L.ANNAPOORNA VISHNU V.K. ABHIRAMI K. UDAY

¶18

SMT NISHA BOSE, SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022

¶21

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The petitioner herein states that he is presently functioning as the Manager of TKMRM Vocational Higher Secondary School, an aided school governed by the provisions of the Kerala Education Act and the Rules framed thereunder. His grievance in this writ petition concerns the delay

¶24

on the part of the 2nd respondent in granting approval to the appointment of the 4th respondent as Principal of the school.

¶25

According to the petitioner, consequent to the retirement of

¶26

Smt. Renu S., who was the Principal of the School on attaining superannuation, Smt. Sreelekha C., the 4th respondent, who is working as a Non-vocational teacher (Commerce - Senior Selection Grade), was appointed as the Principal by Ext.P1 order dated 1.6.2022. The petitioner contends that the documents pertaining to the 4th respondent for grant of

¶27

approval was forwarded to the 2nd respondent through the 3rd respondent as is evident from Ext.P8 letter. Though Exts.P9 and P10 reminders were sent, no steps were taken by the 2nd respondent to grant approval. While approval was pending as aforesaid, without notice to the petitioner or the 4th respondent, Ext.P11 order was issued by the 2nd

¶28

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022

¶29

¶30

respondent appointing the 5th respondent, a Vocational teacher (Office Secretaryship) as Principal of the school overlooking the earlier appointment and by usurping the rights of the Manager, who is the appointing authority. According to the petitioner, Ext.P11 cannot even otherwise be sustained in view of Ext.P13 letter dated 19.1.2019 issued by the 1st respondent banning all appointments to various categories in the Vocational section including promotion. According to the petitioner, being a Vocational teacher, the 5th respondent could not have been appointed as the Principal of the school as long as Ext.P13 is in force. The petitioner contends that raising his grievances against Ext.P11 order, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P15 which is pending before the 2nd respondent. It is contended that the 4th respondent has been working as Principal of the school from 1.6.2022 and in that view of the matter, Ext.P11 order cannot be sustained. He contends that raising all these contentions, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P18 appeal before the 1st respondent which is stated to be pending. It is in the afore circumstances that this writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P11 order and to issue directions to the 2nd respondent to consider the grant of approval to the appointment of the 4th respondent and for incidental reliefs.

¶31

3. I have heard Sri.N.Unnikrishnan, the learned counsel

¶32

appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Sajeev Kumar K Gopal, the learned

¶33

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022

¶34

¶35

counsel appearing for the 4th respondent, Sri Aravindakshan Pillai, the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent and the learned Senior Government Pleader.

¶36

From the materials made available before this Court, it appears that the petitioner has approached the 1st respondent and has preferred Ext.P18 appeal, which is stated to be pending. The petitioner has a contention that in view of Ext.P13 order, despite the fact that the 5th respondent is the seniormost, he could not have been appointed as the Principal. In view of the pendency of Ext.P18, I do not think that this Court will be justified in considering the merits of the factual assertions made by the petitioner in this writ petition.

¶37

However, I find from the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that due to the dispute with regard to the appointment of Principal, there is no Drawing and Disbursing Officer at the moment, and the salary of the teachers since June, 2022 is yet to be disbursed. I also find that a representation submitted by the teachers before the Educational Authorities to initiate steps to disburse their salary is also pending. I am of the view that till the controversy and rival claims with regard to the appointment to the post of Principal is resolved, the 4th respondent, who has been appointed as Principal by the Manager can be ordered to provisionally function as the Drawing and

¶38

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022

¶39

¶40

Disbursing Officer. It is made clear that such an exercise is being carried out solely to ensure that the teachers in the institution receive their salary and shall not be reckoned as conferring any rights to the 4th respondent.

¶41

Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that this writ petition can be disposed of by ordering as follows:

¶42

a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up Ext.P18 appeal preferred by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the party respondents, expeditiously, in any event, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶43

b) As an interim measure, and until orders are passed by the 1st respondent, the 4th respondent shall be permitted to discharge the duty as a Drawing and Disbursing Officer of the TKMRM Vocational Higher Secondary School, Vallana. It is reiterated that the appointment of the 4th respondent as Drawing and Disbursing Officer is purely provisional and for the purpose of enabling the teachers to draw their salary on time. No advantage whatsoever shall be claimed by the 4th respondent on the strength of this order. This

¶44

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022

¶45

¶46

arrangement shall continue till the 1st respondent passes an order on

¶47

Ext.P18 appeal.

¶48

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶51

JUDGE

¶52

IAP

¶53

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022

¶54

¶55

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29504/2022

¶56

PETITIO	NER'S	EXHIBITS:
Exhibit	P1	A TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 01.06.2022.
Exhibit	P2	A TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT OF CHANGE OF STAFF, AS REQUIRED, IN RESPECT OF 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P3	A TRUE COPY OF JOINING REPORT DATED 01.06.2022 OF 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P4	A TRUE COPY OF DECLARATION DATED 01.06.2022 MADE BY THE WRIT PETITIONER.
Exhibit	P5	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.2/2022 DATED 01.06.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P6	A TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT OF RELINQUISHMENT DATED 01.06.2022 SUBMITTED BY SHRI PRASAD V. THOMAS, NON VOCATIONAL TEACHER (ENGLISH) IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED
Exhibit	P7	A TRUE COPY OF SENIORITY LIST (2022-2023) OF NON-VOCATIONAL & VOCATIONAL TEACHERS AS ON 01.06.2022 OF T.K.M.R.M. V.H.S. SCHOOL, VALLANA.
Exhibit	P8	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.12/2022 DATED 12.06.2022.
Exhibit	P9	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.21/2022 DATED 29.08.2022 AGAINST THE DELAY IN GRANTING THE APPROVAL TO THE APPOINTMENT OF 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P10	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.22/2022 DATED 29.08.2022 AGAINST NON GRANTING THE APPROVAL TO THE APPOINT OF 4TH RESPONDENT AS PRINCIPAL.

¶57

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022

¶58

¶59

Exhibit P11	A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.E5/4005/2022 DATED 31.08.2022.
Exhibit P12	A TRUE COPY OF ANSWERS GIVEN TO QUESTION NO.T3240 BY THE HON'BLE EDUCATIONAL MINISTER.
Exhibit P13	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.G.EDN.SC 2/257/2018/G.EDN. DATED 19.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P14	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.203/SC/2017/G.EDN. DATED 17.08.2018 ISSUED FROM FIRST RESPONDENT'S OFFICE.
Exhibit P15	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. 23/2022 DATED 29.08.2022 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXPRESSING HIS OBJECTION AGAINST APPOINTMENT OF 5TH RESPONDENT AS PRINCIPAL IN THE SCHOOL DIRECTLY.
Exhibit P16	A TRUE COPY OF MEMO NO.17/2022 DATED 01.09.2022 ISSUED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P17	A TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.24/2022 DATED 05.09.2022
Exhibit P18	A TRUE COPY OF APPEAL NO.25/2022 DATED 02.09.2022 BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P19	A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 20/9/2022 SUBMITTED STAFF OF THE SCHOOL.
Exhibit P20	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.28/2022 DATED 28/9/2022
Exhibit P21	A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 2/12/2021 IN WPC NO.27328/2021
Exhibit P22	A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.E5/4979/2021 DATED 10/12/2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶60

WP(C) NO. 29504 OF 2022 10

¶61

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶62

Exhibit R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE MANAGER TKMRM VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VALLANA DATED 01/06/2022

¶63

Exhibit R4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF CHANGE OF STAFF ISSUED BY THE MANAGER.

¶64

Exhibit R4(c) TRUE COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT DATED 01/06/2022 Exhibit R4(d) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION BY THE MANAGER DATED 1/6/2022

Anwar Mohamed v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anwar Mohamed 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

Prabhath Balakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Rani S. Vs the State of Kerala

Anjana K. Vs the Director of General Education

*[Bindu A.P. Vs State of Kerala

Muhemed Sadique.T Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Biju Paul A.P Vs the State of Kerala