Disposed

Anie Varghese v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Oct 2022WP(C)/7559/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Petition concerns employment disputes involving a teacher's deployment and seniority. The Court disposed of the petition at the admission stage by directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's revision petition (Ex.P8) within four months after afording a hearing opportunity.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 1st respondent to consider Petitioner's revision petition (Ex.P8) within four months after affording hearing opportunity; dispensation of notice to respondents 5-7.

Anie Varghese Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V FRIDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 29TH ASWINA, 1944

¶3

WP(C) NO. 7559 OF 2022

¶4

PETITIONER/S:

¶5

ANIE VARGHESE
AGED 48 YEARS
WIFE OF (LATE) DIJI VARGHESE,
DRAWING TEACHER,
ST MARYS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
NIRANAM, TIRUVALLA-689 621, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT
(RESIDING AT CHERUNILATH PUTHEN VEEDU,
VALANJAVATTOM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT)
BY ADVS.
V.A.MUHAMMED
M.SAJJAD

¶6

RESPONDENT/S:

¶7

1THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT ANNEXE 11,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶8

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

¶9

3THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
PATHANAMTHITTA @ THIRUVALLA-689 101

¶10

4THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
TIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 101
5THE MANAGER,
ST. MARYS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
NIRANAM, TIRUVALLA-689 621,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT
6THE PRINCIPAL,
ST. MARYS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, NIRANAM,
TIRUVALLA-689 621, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT

¶11

WP(C) NO. 7559 OF 2022

¶12

¶13

7SRI JACOB GEORGE,
PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER,
ST. MARYS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
NIRANAM, TIRUVALLA-689 621,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT

¶14

SMT MARY BEENA JOSEPH SR GP

¶15

THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSION
ON21.10.2022,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYDELIVEREDTHE
FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 7559 OF 2022

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner states that she entered service in the St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School, Niranam, as a Drawing Teacher on 22.07.1997. She contends that she has continuous service from 01.02.1999 onwards. According to the petitioner, orders have been issued deploying the petitioner under clubbing arrangement, treating the petitioner as junior in the category of specialist teacher. The petitioner contends that though the Manager addressed the 3rd respondent, the request was declined. The petitioner contends that challenging the order of deployment, she has preferred Exhibit P8 revision petition before the 1st respondent. The prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the same.

¶20

When this writ petition was taken up for consideration, Sri. M. Sajjad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that direction be issued to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P8 submitted by the petitioner within a time frame, with due notice.

¶21

Heard Smt. Mary Beena Joseph, the learned Senior Government Pleader. In view of the order that I propose to pass, no prejudice would be caused to respondents 5 to 7 if notice is dispensed with.

¶22

WP(C) NO. 7559 OF 2022

¶23

¶24

After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this

¶25

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 at the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:

¶26

a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P8 submitted by the petitioner after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorized representative and respondents 5 to 7.

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

¶32

avs

¶33

WP(C) NO. 7559 OF 2022

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7559/2022

¶36

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶37

`Exhibit`	`P1` `TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE SENIORITY` `LIST AS ON 1.1.2017`
`Exhibit`	`P2` `TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO 17395/2018` `DATED 3.18.2018`
`Exhibit`	`P3` `TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO 2059/2018 DATED` `18.3.2020`
`Exhibit`	`P4` `TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO 30452/2015` `DATED 8.12.2021`
`Exhibit`	`P5` `TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO B1/6417/2016 DATED` `26.8.2016 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit`	`P6` `TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO 111/2017/G.EDN DATED` `7.9.2017`
`Exhibit`	`P7` `TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO B1/9972/2019 DATED` `2.9.2021 OF THE DDE, PATHANAMTHITTA`
`Exhibit`	`P8` `TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BEFORE` `THE GOVERNMENT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 3.1.2022` `(WITHOUT EXHIBITS)`

Anie Varghese v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anie Varghese v. the 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

S.Sreevidya Vs the State of Kerala

A.M.Deepa, Vs the State of Kerala

Mini.K.v Vs the State of Kerala

HUDA Beevi A.I Vs State of Kerala

Pratheesh Kumar K.T. Vs State of Kerala

Dineesh G, Vs the State of Kerala