Disposed

C.v.Pratheesh v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Jul 2024WP(C)/40037/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Sanskrit teacher approved only as part-time sought full-time approval from his 2007 appointment. The ban on sanctioning posts had been lifted by a 2010 Government Order, but approval was refused because the school Manager had not executed the bond. Relying on a prior judgment and Government Orders in similar cases, the court set aside the impugned order and directed reconsideration of the revisi

What did the court decide?

Ext.P4 order set aside; first respondent directed to reconsider the revision petition and pass appropriate orders within two months.

C.v.Pratheesh Vs the State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ

¶4

MONDAY, THE 22^nd DAY OF JULY 2024 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 40037 OF 2016

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

C.V.PRATHEESH, AGED 35 YEARS. SON OF C.A. VELAYUDHAN, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (SANSKRIT), ST. MARY'S HIGH SCHOOL, KRARIYELI, KOMBANAD, PERUMBAVOOR 683 546.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.M.SAJJAD

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

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

¶11

2 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014.

¶12

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM AT KAKKANAD 682 030.

¶13

4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 686 691.

¶14

5 THE MANAGER, ST. MARY'S HIGH SCHOOL, KRARIYELI, KOMBANAD, PERUMBAVOOR 683 546, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶15

R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.E.G.GORDEN

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 22.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

W/P(C) No.40037 of 2016

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This writ petition is preferred inter alia seeking to set aside Exts.P2, P3 and P4.

¶21

It is stated that the petitioner was appointed as HSA (Sanskrit) in the fifth respondent School from 01.06.2007 against a retirement vacancy. The second respondent approved the appointment of the petitioner only as a part-time teacher. The appeal preferred before the third respondent was also rejected on the ground that though there was sufficient pupils strength for sanctioning full-time post of HSA (Sanskrit), owing to be ban as per G.O (P) No. 317/2005/G.Edn, dated 17.08.2005, the post cannot be sanctioned.

¶22

At this background, it is stated by the petitioner that thereafter the ban was lifted as per G.O.(P) No.10/10/G.Edn, dated 12.01.2010. Under such circumstance, the petitioner moved the authorities concerned to get full time benefit and approval with effect from 01.06.2007.

¶23

Eventually that was reached before the Government. On considering the prayers of the petitioner, it is found that full time post of HSA (Sanskrit) sought for is admissible since 01.06.2007. However, that was declined on the ground that the Manager has not executed the required bond. In this regard, the petitioner has produced Ext.P9 judgment of this Honourable Court in W.P.(C) No.35602/2019 and Exts.P10 and P11 orders

¶24

W/P(C) No.40037 of 2016

¶25

¶26

of the Government in similarly situated cases. In the light of judgment and Government Orders, the petitioner seeks similar treatment in this regard.

¶27

I heard Smt.Jenzia, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Senior Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 4. Service to the fifth respondent is declared, on failure to appear even after taking sufficient steps.

¶28

On considering Ext.P4 impugned order, it appears that even though there was enough pupils strength to sanction full time course of HSA (Sanskrit) in the school, only because of the ban in creating additional division, the same was not sanctioned. However, the post was sanctioned in the light of G.O.(P) No.10/10/G.Edn, dated 12.01.2010 and thereby the Manager is bound to execute a bond. In this case, the Manager has not submitted a bond. Only because of that reason, the approval cannot be given with effect from 01.06.2007.

¶29

On perusing Exts.P10 and P11 it appears that the Government has considered similarly situated cases, thereby granted sanction to approve the full time post in such schools, also perused the order in Ext.P9 judgment wherein the order declining approval of appointment of the petitioner therein set aside and directed to reconsider the revision petition by the first respondent and to pass fresh orders, granting approval to the petitioner, treating the Manager as deemed to have given a bond as contemplated

¶30

W/P(C) No.40037 of 2016

¶31

¶32

under G.O.(P) No.10/10/G.Edn, dated 12.01.2010.

¶33

On going by the factual situation in the case, I do not find any reason to deviate from all these cases. The petitioner's case is squarely covered by the situation mentioned in Exts. P10 and P11 and also Ext.P9 judgment.

¶34

Accordingly, I prefer to set aside Ext.P4 order and direct the Government to reconsider the matter in the light of Exts.P10 and P11 orders issued by the Government in similarly situated cases and also on taking note of the direction issued in Ext.P9 judgment in a similarly situated case.

¶35

There will be a direction to the first respondent to reconsider the

¶36

revision petition filed by the petitioner which is referred as item No.1 in Ext.P4 order and pass appropriate orders in the light of the aforementioned directions within a period of two months from today.

¶37

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

P.M.MANOJ

JUDGE

DMR/-

W/P(C) No.40037 of 2016

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40037/2016

¶45

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶46

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OFTHE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 01-06-2007 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION DATED 13-05-2008 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18-12-2008 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(RT) NO 1624/2014/G.EDN DATED 25-04-2014 OF THE GOVERNMENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO 16337/2009-J DATED 09-07-2010 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO 6039/2012-J DATED 18-02-2015 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO 15998/2015-Y DATED 28-07-2015 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO 3383 OF 2013-W DATED 17-11-2016 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP (C) No.35602/2019 DATED 14.02.2022 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE GO (Rt) No.305/2020/G.EDN DATED 17.01.2020 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE GO (Rt) No.1106/2019/G. EDN DATED 21.03.2019 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

¶47

// TRUE COPY //

¶48

P.A. TO JUDGE

C.v.Pratheesh v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.v.Pratheesh 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

General Secretary, Ernakulam District Inudstrial Estate Mazdoor Sangh Vs the Managind Director, Nadukkara Agro Processing Company Ltd.

Amina Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Kunju C a, Vs the District Collector

M/S. St. Anotny Timber Depot Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Vavachan Alias Babu Vs State of Kerala

Babu T.A Vs State of Kerala