Disposed

Sophy John v. the Director of Public Instructions

Kerala HC11 Apr 2024WP(C)/32783/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A cook in a school mid-day meal scheme was dismissed by the Panchayath contrary to circular guidelines; the Assistant Educational Officer refused to approve the dismissal. The High Court directed respondents 3 and 4 to implement that order and made an earlier interim order absolute.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 3 and 4 directed to implement Ext.P3 order reinstating/continuing petitioner in service; interim order of 9.10.2018 made absolute.

Sophy John Vs the Director of Public Instructions — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 32783 OF 2018

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 32783 OF 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SOPHY JOHN, AGED 62 YEARS W/O JOHN (LATE),RESIDING AT PARATHARA THEKKETHIL, NJAKKANAL PO, KRISHNAPURAM 690533

¶8

BY ADVS.
A.JAYASANKAR
MANU GOVIND
ASHWIN SETHUMADHAVAN
S.SABARINADH
RAHUL SURENDRAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHI, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695014

¶11

2 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KAYAMKULAM 690502

¶12

3 THE KRISHNAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OFFICE OF KRISHNAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SEVAGRAMKAPPIL-KUTIPURAM ROAD, KRISHNAPURAM 690533, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶13

4 MANOVIKAS KENDRA, WARD NO.10, KRISHNAPURAM P.O.-690533, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.

¶14

BY ADVS. VINCENT JOSEPH SRI.V.BOBAN

¶15

SRI.BIMAL.K.NATH, SR.G.P.

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

¶17

ON 11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C) NO. 32783 OF 2018

¶19

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Dated this the 11^th day of April, 2024.

¶22

The present Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner, who claims that she is working as a Cook in the Mid-day Meal Scheme of the 4^th respondent. However, on 31.8.2018 the 3^rd respondent removed the petitioner from her service. When the petitioner approached the 2^nd respondent by Ext.P3 order, the 2^nd respondent did not approve the said action. It is for implementing the order of the 2^nd respondent, the present writ petition has been filed. The 2^nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit. In which it is stated as thus:

¶23

“3. It is submitted that the conditions of the employment of a cook in mid day meal scheme are governed by the circular (Exhibit P1) issued by the 1st respondent. As such the power for appointment/dismissal of cook is vested on the noon meal committee of the school (Clause h, I & J of page No. 4 of the Exhibit P1). The committee shall take such a decision only in the presence of the Assistant Educational Officer or Noon Meal Officer and 3/4th of the committee members shall be present in the committee. But the Secretary, Krishnapuram Grama Panchayath issued an order on 22.09.2018, dismissing the petitioner from service which does not obey the guidelines of the Exhibit P1.

¶24

The dismissal order issued by the 3rd respondent was not accepted by this respondent as it has violated all the procedures in the guidelines on Exhibit P1. The conditions of the employment of a cook in mid day meal scheme is governed by the guidelines of Exhibit P1. As such

¶25

WP(C) NO. 32783 OF 2018

¶26

¶27

this respondent has directed the 4^th respondent to permit the petitioner to continue in service.”

¶28

The 3^rd respondent has filed counter affidavit in which the

¶29

order impugned has sought to be sustained.

¶30

I have heard Smt.Parvathy Menon, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri.Bimal K.Nath, the learned Senior Government Pleader.

¶31

I have considered the rival submissions raised across the Bar. Indisputedly, by Ext.P3 order the 2^nd respondent refused to approve the action of the Panchayath. Ext.P3 has been passed on 22.9.2018. It appears that Ext.P3 has not been challenged in any proceedings so far and therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the 3^rd and 4^th respondents has to be necessarily implement Ext.P3 order.

¶32

In addition to the above, when the Writ Petition came up

¶33

for consideration on 9.10.2018, this Court passed the following order:

¶34

“Notice before admission by speed post to respondents 3 and 4. Learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 and 2.

¶35

If the petitioner is in service as on today, she shall be permitted to continue until further orders and the Principal

¶36

WP(C) NO. 32783 OF 2018

¶37

¶38

shall ensure that Ext.P3 order is implemented in its full spirit.”

¶39

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of

¶40

directing the 3^rd and 4^th respondents to implement Ext.P3 order and

¶41

consequently the order passed on 9.10.2018 is made absolute.

¶42

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

EASWARAN S.

JUDGE

WP(C) NO. 32783 OF 2018

¶48

¶49

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32783/2018

¶50

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶51

EXHIBIT P1A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO
N.M.A1/37000/2018/DP1 DATED 30.5.2018
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DISMISSAL ORDER
NO K3-4304/2018 DATED 31.8.2018 ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO A-
1037/2018 DATED 22.9.2018 ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT.

¶52

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

Sophy John v. the Director of Public Instructions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sophy John v. the Director of Public Instructions

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

Jibin Joseph Vs the Union of India

Sebastian Vs the Authorized Officer, Wayanad District

Promodkumar Vs the Director (Complaint & Litigation) Central Organization

The Principal Commissioner of Central Tax & Central Excise Vs the Chief Manager, Federal Bank

M.R.Ramakrishnan Vs Union of India

Sayed Mohammed Koya Vs the Administrator