Disposed

C.Maria Simon v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Jun 2023WP(C)/5619/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition filed by a High School Assistant seeking approval of her appointment from 01.06.2009. The court directed the Government to consider her representation within four months, deeming that the school manager executed the required bond under the relevant G.O.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Government to consider the petitioner's representation and approve her appointment from 01.06.2009 within four months, deeming the manager executed the bond.

C.Maria Simon Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 19^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 29TH JYAISHTA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 5619 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

C.MARIA SIMON AGED 37 YEARS W/O. P. F. VARGHESE, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (ENGLISH), CHALDEAN SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, THRISSUR - 680 001. (RESIDING AT PADAYATTIL HOUSE, WEST GOSAYIKUNNU, KURIACHIRA, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 006). BY ADVS. V.A.MUHAMMED M.SAJJAD

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

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

¶10

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014. 3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE AT THRISSUR - 680 003. 4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER PALACE ROAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 020. 5 THE MANAGER CHALDEAN SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, THRISSUR - 680 001. BY ADV. SMT.NISHA BOSE, SENIOR GP

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

¶13

WP(C) NO. 5619 OF 2022

¶14

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶15

-----------------------------W.P.(C)No. 5619 of 2022

¶16

---------------------------------------------Dated this the 19^th day of June, 2023

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The above writ petition is filed with the

¶19

following prayers:

¶20

“(i) call for the records relating to Exhibit P-1 and set aside the original of the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order.

¶21

(ii) declare that the Petitioner is entitled to get approval to her appointment from 01.06.2009 onwards and consequential benefits.

¶22

(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the Respondents to approve the appointment of the Petitioner from 01.06.2009 and disburse the attendant benefits forthwith.

¶23

(iv) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding

¶24

¶25

WP(C) NO. 5619 OF 2022

¶26

the 1 st Respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P-6 with notice to the Petitioner and in a time bound manner, duly taking note of Exhibits P-3, P-4 and P-8 to P-10.

¶27

(v) pass such other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the circumstances of the case.”[SIC]

¶28

2. Petitioner was appointed as High School

¶29

Assistant (HSA) in the Chaldean Syrian Higher Secondary School, Thrissur from 01.06.2009 onwards. The proposal for approval of the petitioner was rejected stating that there is a ban order. It is submitted that the appointment was approved from 01.06.2011 onwards and thus the petitioner is continuing in service with salary since then. The issue is regarding the non approval of the petitioner from 01.06.2009 onwards. It is submitted that, in the light of Exts.P3 and P4

¶30

¶31

WP(C) NO. 5619 OF 2022

¶32

judgments, the approving authority has to deem that the Manager had executed the bond in terms of G.O.(P)No.10/10/G.Edn dated 12.01.2010. The petitioner already approached the Government with Ext.P6 representation. The grievance of the petitioner is that the same is not considered.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. No notice is necessary to the 5^th respondent at this stage. If the 5^th respondent is aggrieved by any of the directions issued by this Court, the 5^th respondent is free to file a Review petition before this Court.

¶34

After hearing both sides, I think this writ petition itself can be disposed of directing the Government to consider Ext.P6 deeming that the Manager had executed the bond.

¶35

¶36

WP(C) NO. 5619 OF 2022

¶37

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:

¶38

i. The 1^st respondent is directed to

¶39

consider and pass appropriate orders in Ext.P6, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 5^th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶40

ii. While deciding the matter, the 1^st respondent will deem that the Manager had executed the bond in terms of G.O. (P)No.10/10/G.Edn dated 12.01.2010.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

¶43

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶44

WP(C) NO. 5619 OF 2022

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5619/2022

¶47

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶48

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE	ORDER
	NO.B4/4497/09/K.DIS. DATED 22. OF THE DEO, THRISSUR.	01.2010
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL NO.B4.11095/2011/K.DIS.	ORDER DATED
	13.01.2012 ISSUED BY THE THRISSUR.	DEO,
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGME W.A.NO.2290/2015 DATED 25.07.20	NT IN 17.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGME W.A.NO.2091/2018 DATED 28.06.20	NT IN 19.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT NO.60930/J2/11/G.EDN. 25.10.2011.	LETTER DATED
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESE	NTATION
	SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER	BEFORE
	THE GOVERNMENT DATED 07.	02.2022
	(WITHOUT EXHINITS).
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN NO.3635/2021 DATED 12.02.2021.	W.P.(C)
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE	GO(RT)
	NO.4664/2021/G.EDN. DATED 16.10	.2021.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN NO.3382/2021 DATED 10.03.2021.	W.P.(C)
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN NO.35602/2019 DATED 14.02.2022.	W.P.(C)

¶49

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

¶50

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

C.Maria Simon v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Maria Simon 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Praveen K Vs State of Kerala

Yoosaf Tm Vs State of Kerala

Deepthi Vs State of Kerala

Ramakrishnan C Vs State of Kerala

Suneera Firoz Vs State of Kerala

Nadeer Ali Vs State of Kerala