High Court of KeralaWP(C)/17692/2006dismissed

Younus Salim v. State Of Kerala

2015-09-25Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/3RD ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 17692 of 2006 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:

------------------ P.V.YOUNUS SALIM, H.S.A. (ENGLISH) KUNNAMANGALAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOZHIKODE. BY ADVS.SRI.P.J.MATHEW SRI.THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN RESPONDENTS:

-----------------------

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS TRIVANDRUM.

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE.

4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

5. THE MANAGER, KUNNAMANGALAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOZHIKODE.

6. SMT.PRIYA.M., H.S.A. (PHYSICAL SCIENCE), KUNNAMANGALAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S. JAMAL BY ADVS. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 17692 of 2006 (F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :- ----------------------------------- EXT.P1 - COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION DATED 31.05.2004.

EXT.P2 - COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 07.03.2005.

EXT.P3 - COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 30.05.2006 AS NO.K.DIS.31480/03/B5.

EXT.P4 - COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE GOVERNMENT DATED 07.01.2002 AS NO.G.O.(MS) NO.11/2002/G.EDN.

EXT.P5 - COPY OF THE RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- --------------------------------------- EXT.R6(A) - COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.22277 OF 2005 OF THIS COURT.

EXT.R6(B) - COPY OF THE REVISION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT ON 16.08.2005.

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE sp

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P(C). No.17692 of 2006 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2015.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the petitioner's appointment as HSA (English) with effect from 05.06.2002 has been approved, but was subsequently withdrawn. The controversy arose on the petitioner and the 6th respondent being appointed on 05.06.2002 respectively in the vacancy of HSA (English) and HSA (Physical Science). As on the year 2002-2003, the sanctioned posts and the available hands are follows: Subject Sanctioned Available Physical Science 5 including the 6th respondent Natural Science Maths Social Studies English

2. The petitioner obviously was appointed in a retirement

WP(C) No.17692 of 2006 vacancy of one HSA (Maths) in the previous year. Hence, the available teachers shown for Maths in the table above is in addition to the retirement vacancy. The petitioner was appointed as an HSA (English) under the retirement vacancy of HSA (Maths) as permitted by G.O.(MS) No.11/2002/G.Edn. dated 07.01.2002. The 6th respondent's approval was rejected on the ground that the Manager had not sought for cancellation of the petitioner's approval. Subsequently, however the 6th respondent was approved and the petitioner's approval was cancelled. The question now to be decided is as to whether the petitioner's appointment is proper and is entitled to be approved.

3. Admittedly, English was made a core subject by GO(MS) No.11/2202/G.Edn. dated 07.01.2002. However, care was taken by the Government in so far as directing any retrenched HSA in another core subject to be accommodated in HSA (English), so as to avoid retrenchment, especially since 2002, English was taught by HSA's of other core subjects. Hence, the implementation of the G.O. and appointment of HSA (English) was to be in a phased manner.

WP(C) No.17692 of 2006

4. In the subject academic year, as is seen from the list above, there were two excess Maths teachers and one excess Social Science teacher. To avoid their retrenchment, they had to be necessarily accommodated as HSA (English). On such accommodation being made; coupled with the two HSA (English) already appointed, the sanctioned posts would be filled and there would be no vacancy for appointment of the petitioner. In such circumstances, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned orders.

The writ petition would stand dismissed. No costs. Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE.