Allowed

Preetha S L v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Dec 2022WP(C)/4814/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging salary fixation orders due to failed K-TET, the High Court of Kerala directed the District Educational Officer to reconsider the petitioner's subsequent qualification with a hearing, while maintaining the interim salary order for six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 4th respondent to consider the petitioner's petition with a hearing within six weeks; interim salary order continued.

Preetha S L Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 4814 OF 2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V WEDNESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA,

¶6

1944

¶7

WP(C) NO. 4814 OF 2022

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

PREETHA S L HST (MALAYALAM), DR.C T EAPEN MEMORIAL RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL, MUTHUPILAKKADU, SASTHAMCOTTAH, KOLLAM, PIN-690 520. (RESIDING AT KOUSTHUBAM, KOICKAL BHAGAM, WEST KALLADA, KOLLAM) PIN - 690520 BY ADVS. S.SANTHOSH KUMAR BABY SUJATHA

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.

¶12

2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 014.

¶13

3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THEVALLY P O, KOLLAM, PIN- 691 009.

¶14

WP(C) NO. 4814 OF 2022

¶15

¶16

4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHANDAMUKKU, KOTTARAKKARA, PIN-691 506.

¶17

5 THE MANAGER DR. C. T EAPEN MEMORIAL RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL, MUTHUPILAKKADU P O, SASTHAMCOTTAH, KOLLAM, PIN-690 520.

¶18

6 THE HEADMISTRESS DR. C. T EAPEN MEMORIAL RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL, MUTHUPILAKKADU P O, SASTHAMCOTTAH, KOLLAM, PIN-690 520.

¶19

SMT SAROJINI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C) NO. 4814 OF 2022

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The petitioner states that she is presently working as High School Teacher in the Dr. C.T Eapen Memorial Residential High School, an aided school under the management of the 5th respondent and governed by the provisions of the Education Act and the Rules framed thereunder.

¶25

The petitioner contends that the 4th respondent has issued Ext.P6 order wherein it is stated that the petitioner was appointed with a condition that she shall pass K-TET within the time stipulated therein, but the petitioner failed to clear the test. It is also ordered that the salary due to the petitioner is liable to be refixed and the increments already granted are to be withdrawn. On the strength of the said order, the Headmistress has issued Ext.P10 letter ordering the petitioner to refund the excess salary based on the refixaton carried out by the DEO. It is in the afore circumstances that this writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P6 order and Ext.P10 letter and for a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to draw salary based on Ext.P2 fixation of pay with subsequent increments and for consequential reliefs.

¶26

Sri.S.Santhosh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the

¶27

petitioner, submitted that while the writ petition was pending consideration

¶28

WP(C) NO. 4814 OF 2022

¶29

¶30

before this Court, the petitioner had appeared for the K-TET conducted by the State Government on 05.05.2022, and she has qualified, as is evident from Ext.P12. The petitioner states that on securing such qualification, she has submitted Ext.P13 petition before the DEO concerned to restore the increments granted till 01.08.2018 and grant all increments due thereafter, including Higher Grade and fixation of salary based on the pay revision. The learned counsel submits that in view of the subsequent turn of events, the petitioner would be satisfied if the 4th respondent is directed to consider Ext.P13 and take a decision.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶32

In view of the order that I propose to pass, notice to respondents 5 and 6 is dispensed with.

¶33

After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar, and the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by issuing the following directions:

¶34

a) There will be a direction to the 4th respondent to take

¶35

up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P13 after

¶36

WP(C) NO. 4814 OF 2022

¶37

¶38

affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorized representative and the respondents 5 and 6. Until orders are passed, the interim order dated 15.02.2022 shall continue.

¶39

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶40

c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent for further action.

¶41

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶44

JUDGE

¶45

IAP

¶46

WP(C) NO. 4814 OF 2022

¶47

¶48

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4814/2022

¶49

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶50

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 01/08/2012 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ORDER DATED 21/10/2012 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FIXATION OF PAY IN THE REVISED SCALE DATED 19/04/2016 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF G.O (P) NO.294/2012/G.EDN. DATED 20/09/2012
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O (MS) NO.58/2021/GEN.EDN. DATED 12/02/2021
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 18/6/2019 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO: B6/4684/2021 DATED 3/12/2021 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE AUDIT OBJECTION OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT PERTAINING TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P8	TRUE COPY OF GO (MS) NO 194/2019/GEN. EDN DATED 15/11/2019
Exhibit P9	TRUE COPY OF G.O(MS) NO.104/2021/GEN. EDN. DATED 19/02/2021

¶51

WP(C) NO. 4814 OF 2022

¶52

¶53

Exhibit P10	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO: B. 124/2021 DATED 27/12/2021 OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P11	TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 27/01/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P12	THE TRUE COPY OF THE K-TET ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATE DATED 12/08/2022 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
Exhibit P13	THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 15/09/2022 ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES FILED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT

Preetha S L v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Preetha S L 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

E.N.Vasudevan, Vs the State of Kerala

K. Devaki, Vs State of Kerala

Adarsh Muralidharan, Vs Central Board Secondary Eduction

K.J.Varghese Vs the State of Kerala

Kurien Eapen Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Betcy Baby Vs State of Kerala