Disposed

The Manager v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Jan 2023WP(C)/720/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking direction to restore divisions and repatriate retrenched teachers. It directed the Deputy Director of Education to consider a pending statutory appeal expeditiously, noting a fitness certificate for additional classrooms. Necessary steps for repatriation to be taken if the appeal is favorable.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on the statutory appeal within one month, taking note of the fitness certificate for additional classrooms.

The Manager Vs State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶3

TUESDAY, THE 10THDAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 20TH POUSHA,1944

¶4

WP(C) NO. 720 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

THE MANAGER
AGED 75 YEARS
C A HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
COYALMANNAM, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678571

¶7

BY ADV U.BALAGANGADHARAN

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT (ANNEX),
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶10

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014

¶11

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001

¶12

4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MUNICIPAL BUILDING, ROBINSON ROAD, PALAKKAD - PIN - 678001

¶13

SMT NISHA BOSE SR GP

¶14

THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSION
ON10.01.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYDELIVEREDTHE
FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) NO. 720 OF 2023

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The petitioner states that he is the Manager of C.A. Higher Secondary

¶19

school, Coyalmannam. He has approached this Court seeking to quash Exhibit P2 Staff Fixation Order to the extent that it reduces 6 divisions for the academic year 2022-23. The petitioner has also sought direction to the 4th respondent to restore 38 divisions and to repatriate the teachers retrenched pursuant to the staff fixation order and grant them all consequential benefits.

¶20

Sri. Balagangadharan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner has approached the 3rd respondent and has preferred Exhibit P4 statutory appeal invoking Chapter XXIII Rule 12D of the Kerala Education Rules as early as 29.08.2022, however, no orders have been passed. It is submitted that in the meantime, the Executive Engineer, LSGD, has issued Exhibit P3 Fitness Certificate in respect of the additional new block having 14 classrooms on 29.08.2022, and the same has effect from 01.06.2022. The learned counsel asserts that in view of Ext.P3, the reasons assigned for retrenching the teachers have no basis. The learned counsel submits that for the time being, the petitioner would be satisfied if directions are issued to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P4 statutory appeal, taking note of Exhibit P3 fitness certificate.

¶21

WP(C) NO. 720 OF 2023

¶22

¶23

I have heard Smt. Nisha Bose, the learned Senior Government

¶24

Pleader.

¶25

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 at the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:

¶26

a) There will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4, adverting to Exhibit P3, after affording an

¶27

opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or his authorized representative.

¶28

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

¶29

c) If favorable orders are issued on Exhibit P4, necessary

¶30

steps shall be taken to repatriate the teachers.

¶31

WP(C) NO. 720 OF 2023

¶32

¶33

d) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy

¶34

of the writ petition along with the judgment before

¶35

the concerned respondent for further action.

¶36

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶39

JUDGE

¶40

avs

¶41

WP(C) NO. 720 OF 2023

¶42

¶43

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 720/2023

¶44

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶45

`Exhibit`	`P1` `A TRUE COPY OF THE FITNESS CERTIFICATE WITH AN` `APPROVED SKETCH SIGNED BY ASSISTANT ENGINEER ,` `COYALMANNAM PANCHAYAT SHOWING ADDITIONAL CLASS ROOMS`
`Exhibit`	`P2` `A TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER NO.` `B1/45308/2022 DATED 24.8.2022 ISSUED BY THE 4TH` `RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit`	`P3` `A TRUE COPY OF THE FITNESS CERTIFICATE IN RESPECT OF` `ADDITIONAL NEW BUILDING DATED 29.8.2022 ISSUED BY THE` `ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER`
`Exhibit`	`P4` `A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 29.8.2022`

The Manager v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Manager 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev K.R Vs State of Kerala

Thrissur District Association of the Deaf Vs Superintendent

Shibu P.S. Vs the Chairman Cum Managing Director

The Principal Vs State of Kerala

Manager, Chettiyath Up School Vs Sindhu K K

Aboobacker Sideequ V.P Vs State of Kerala