Ajitha Kumari.R v State of Kerala and Others

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/25TH JYAISHTA, 1939** **WP(C).No. 18649 of 2017 (E)** **----------------------------** **PETITIONER(S):** **------------------------** **SMT.AJITHA KUMARI.R., W/O.SOMARAJAN, AGED 53 YEARS, WORKING AS HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT, DEVIVILASAM HIGH SCHOOL, MYLOM, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, RESIDING AT VAIYAVILAPUTHEN VEEDU, KURA P.O., KOTTARAKKARA-691 557.** **BY ADVS.SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER, SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN.** **RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** **2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 012.** **3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 001.** **4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 560.** **5. THE MANAGER, DEVIVILASAM HIGH SCHOOL, MYLOM, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 560.** **6. RADHAKRISHNAN M., HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT, DEVIVILASAM HIGH SCHOOL, MYLOM, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 560.** - **R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.MARY BEENA JOSEPH. R6 BY ADVS. SRI.M.R.ANISON,** - **SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI, SMT.V.BHARGAVI (PANANGAD), SMT.P.A.RINUSA,** - **SMT.SIKHA S.NAIR.** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** rs. **WP(C).No. 18649 of 2017 (E)** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-** - **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO.117/2015/GEN.EDU. DATED 16-05-2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS)NO.157/2015 GEN.EDU. DATED 10-06-2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 03-05-2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DM/5/16 DATED 05-05-2016.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13-03-2017 IN WPC NO.17653/2016.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11-04-2017 IN W.A.NO.775/2017.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 20-04-2017 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT MANAGER.** - **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20-04-2017 ISSUED BY TE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20-04-2017 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05-05-2017 IN SLP(C)NO.14201/2017.** - **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29-05-2017 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 31-05-2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31-05-2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** ## **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-** **EXHIBIT- R6(A): TRUE COPY OF THE PROGRAMME NOTICE DATED 10.4.2017 ABOUT AVATHIKALA VINJALAULSAVAVUM SAHAVASA CAMP CONDUCTED IN DEVI VILASOM VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MYLUM.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(B): TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN REPRESENTATION DATED 24.04.2017 SUBMITTED BY 6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** **....2/-** **WP(C).No. 18649 of 2017 (E)** **EXHIBIT-R6(C) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24,04.2017 SUBMITTED BY 6H RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 4H RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT-R6(D) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTER PRINT TAKEN FROM THE SUPREME COURT WEBSITE.** **EXHIBIT R6(E) TRUE COPY OF THE LIST FOR REVALUATION AND S.S.L.C. (SAY) EXAMINATION FORWARDED BY 6TH RESPONDENT IN THE PRESCRIBED FORMAT ON 09.05.2017, 12.05.2017 AND 16.05.2017.** **EXHIBIT-R6(F) TRUE COPY OF THE MEETING OF THE SSLC (SAY) STUDENTS CONVENED ON 08.05.2017.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(G): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02.05.2017 ISSUED BY THE 5 RESPONDENT TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(H) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 04.05.2017 SUBMITTED BY 6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(I) COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07.05.2017 SUBMITTED BY 6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(J) TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES ALONG WITH SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 5H RESPONDENT TO 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 06.05.2017.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(K) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE MEMO OF CHARGES AND SHOW CAUSE NOTICE SUBMITTED BY 6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 10.05.2017.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(L) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.05.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(M): TRUE COPY OF THE PERFORMA FURNISHED BY 6TH RESPONDENT ONLINE SHOWING THE STUDENTS STRENGTH ON 6TH WORKING DAY OF 2017 -2018.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(N) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.B5/2011/2016 DATED 29.05.2017 ISSUED BY THE 4H RESPONDENT TO 6TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT-R6(O) TRUE COPY OF THE SALARY DETAILS OF THE STAFF OF THE SCHOOL ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT TREASURY KOTTARAKKARA ON 05.06.2017.** **//TRUE COPY//** **rs.** **P.S. TO JUDGE** ## **P.V.ASHA, J.** ## **W.P.(C) No.18649 of 2017** ## **Dated this the 15[th] day of June, 2017** ## **JUDGMENT** The dispute arising in this case is based on Ext.P10 order passed by the Honourable Supreme Court on 5.5.2017, in the petition for Special Leave to Appeal © No.14201 of 2017 filed by the 6[th] respondent which reads as follows: “Status quo, as on today, shall be maintained until further orders”. 2. The petitioner herein filed this writ petition challenging Exts.P11 and P13 orders. Ext.P11 is the order passed by the District Educational Officer by which the petitioner was asked to see that the teaching and non teaching staff of the school are paid salary as it was being paid till that date in the light of the fact that the issue regarding appointment of Headmaster is pending before the Supreme Court. The said order is seen passed on the basis of a representation submitted by the staff of the school on 27.5.2017. Ext.P13 is an order passed by the Director of Public Instruction on 31.5.2017 referring to the letter dated 5.5.2016 of the Manager as well as the order dated 5.5.2017 of the Supreme Court. In this order the Director of Public Instruction directed that the 6[th] respondent shall be allowed to continue as Headmaster in the light of the order passed by the Personal Assistant W.P.(C) No.18649/2017 **==> picture [14 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** to the District Educational Officer on 7.12.2016, in the light of the status quo order issued by the Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition filed by the 6[th] respondent. 3. The petitioner was the senior most LPSA in the 5[th] respondent's School. When the Headmistress of the School availed retirement leave, the 5[th] respondent Manager appointed the 6[th] respondent as Headmaster with effect from 5.5.2016, as per Ext.P4 order. The petitioner approached this court in WP(C) No.17653 of 2016 seeking directions for appointment as Headmistress, challenging the orders passed by the educational authorities rejecting her claim for appointment as Headmistress on the ground that she is not test qualified. This court, following the judgment in **Manager Pavandoor,** ## **Kozhikode v. Sadanandan C.M. & Others : 2016 (5) KHC 78** allowed that writ petition as per Ext.P5 judgment, on 13.3.2017 and declared the entitlement of petitioner for promotion as Headmistress in preference to the test qualified juniors and directed the respondent to make appointment of Headmistress, accordingly. 4. The 6[th] respondent took up the matter in Writ Appeal No.775 of 2017 and by Ext.P6 judgment Writ Appeal was dismissed on 11.4.2017. Thereafter the Manager appointed the petitioner as Headmistress as per Ext.P7 order on 20.4.2017. Immediately W.P.(C) No.18649/2017 **==> picture [14 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** thereafter the Manager also instructed the petitioner to take charge from 6[th] respondent. The 6[th] respondent approached the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition and on 5.5.2017 by Ext.P10 order the Supreme Court directed to maintain status quo as on 5.5.2017. It is thereafter on 29.5.2017, that Ext.P11 order was issued by the District Educational Officer in respect of disbursement of salary to the staff of the school. The Director of Public Instruction's order came within another two days on 31.5.2017. The petitioner thereafter filed this writ petition seeking directions to allow her to discharge the duties of Headmistress and challenging Exts.P11 and P13. An interim order was passed by this court on 5.6.2017, which reads as follows: “In case the petitioner was functioning as Headmistress of the School in charge based on Ext.P7 as on the date of Ext.P10 order of the Supreme Court ie. 5.5.2017, the petitioner shall be allowed to continue as Headmistress in charge of the school”. 5. The 6[th] respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that the charge of Headmistress was not handed over to the petitioner, as on the date on which the Supreme Court passed the order. The 6[th] respondent has produced several representations, communications and proceedings in respect of the meetings in which the 6[th] respondent took part either as teacher or as in the capacity of Headmaster of the School. Letters are also seen addressed to the Manager as well as authorities requesting to allow the 6[th] respondent to continue as W.P.(C) No.18649/2017 **==> picture [14 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** Headmaster in the light of the fact that he had been taking steps to approach the Supreme Court. Subsequent to the interim order also it is seen that the 6[th] respondent approached the 5[th] respondent requesting to allow him to continue as Headmaster. The 6[th] respondent had also produced the performa furnished by him on the 6[th] working day, the letter dated 29.5.2017 issued by the 4[th] respondent and salary details of the staff of the school issued by the District Treasury, Kottarakkara dated 5.6.2017. He has also produced the representation submitted before the 5[th] respondent on 7.5.2017, show cause notice issued by the Manager on 6.5.2017 and reply to the memo of charges submitted before the Manager on 10.5.2017. It is the contention of the 6[th] respondent that he had not handed over charge to the petitioner. Apart from that it is his contention that the Manager locked the room in which records are kept and therefore the Manager is not allowing him to function. 6. The learned counsel for the Manager submitted that the Manager had already issued orders appointing the petitioner as Headmaster on 4.4.2017 itself and letters were issued to the petitioner to take charge from the 6[th] respondent and the 6[th] respondent to hand over charge to the petitioner. 7. I heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the W.P.(C) No.18649/2017 **==> picture [14 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 6[th] respondent, the learned counsel appearing for the Manager and the learned Government Pleader. As the petitioner has filed this writ petition aggrieved by Exts.P11 and P13 orders, it is necessary to examine whether the Director of Public Instruction could have issued Ext.P13 order. What is directed in Ext.P13 is to allow the 6[th] respondent to continue on the basis of the interim order passed by the Supreme Court in accordance with the order passed on 7.12.2016 by the Personal Assistant. Ext.P13 does not appear to have been issued after examining the position as on 5.5.2017. The direction of the apex court is to maintain the status of the parties as on the date of the order of the Supreme Court ie. as on 5.5.2017. Therefore the Director of Public Instruction did not have any authority to direct that the 6[th] respondent shall be allowed to continue in accordance with the order passed by the Personal Assistant to District Educational Officer. Remaining grievance of the petitioner is as against Ext.P11 order passed by the District Educational Officer. Ext.P11 order is seen to have been issued in order to see that the staff of the school is getting salary without any delay in the background of the dispute between petitioner and 6[th] respondent with respect to headmastership. That order cannot be said to be in W.P.(C) No.18649/2017 **==> picture [14 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** violation of the status quo order. In the above circumstances Ext.P13 order is quashed. Sd/- **P.V.ASHA JUDGE** rkc