Amal Lal v. State of Kerala and others

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN`** ## **`MONDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF JULY 2023 / 2ND SRAVANA, 1945`** ## **`WP(C) NO. 12010 OF 2021`** ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` AMAL LAL V.K. AGED 28 YEARS S/O.LATE BALAKRISHNAN V.K., KARAYAD ALP SCHOOL, KARAYAD P.O., MEPPAYUR VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673524. BY ADV R.K.MURALEEDHARAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695001.`** - **`2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.`** - **`3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673001.`** - **`4 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673305.`** - **`5 THE MANAGER KARAYAD ALP SCHOOL, KARAYAD P.O., MEPPAYUR VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673524. SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR, SR.GP`** ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO.12010 OF 2021 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## **`JUDGMENT`** ## **Dated this the 24[th] day of July, 2023** ## This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: _“(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction, quashing Ext.P4 order dated 04.02.2021, Ext.P6 order dated 16.02.2021 issued by the 4[th] respondent and Ext.P8 order issued by the 1[st] respondent dated 20.04.2021_ _(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the respondents to restore Ext.P1 staff fixation of Karayad ALP School for the year 2019-20 and further direct to treat the petitioner continuing in the school from 15.07.2019 and to disburse all consequential benefits._ _(iii) Declare that staff fixation of the school for the year 2019-20 completed as per Ext.P1 was regular and in order”_ 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 3. The petitioner contends that he was appointed as LPST in the 5[th] respondent’s school on 12.06.2018 and the appointment was duly approved. Thereafter, in respect of the academic year 2019-20, Ext.P1 staff fixation order was issued on 16.07.2019. While so, a Super Check Cell attached to the 2[nd] respondent conducted inspections in the school on 30.07.2019 and 20.02.2020. It is submitted that on the basis ``` WP(C) NO.12010 OF 2021 ``` ``` 3 ``` of the inspections conducted by the Super Check Cell, a notice was issued to which replies were duly submitted by the Headmaster as well as the Manager. It is stated that the Headmaster had submitted replies with regard to four students who were found absent on both the visits of the Super Check Cell. 4. The 2[nd] respondent thereafter conducted an online hearing and passed Ext.P4 order dated 04.02.2021 reducing one division and post on the finding that the four students found absent on the two visits were bogus admission. It is submitted that the Manager submitted an appeal before the Government pointing out that two students who were found in the Vilayattur Elampilad MUP School were actually students of the 5[th] respondent's school and had been admitted in the school pursuant to transfer certificates issued from the Vilayattur Elampilad MUP School. It is submitted that those two students were actually studying in the school and had continued in the school and had also been promoted to Std.III. It is submitted that proper explanations have been submitted with regard to the other two students, that is Niya Fathima and Tabassum Parveen as well, as ``` WP(C) NO.12010 OF 2021 ``` ``` 4 ``` evidenced by Ext.P7 appeal filed by the Manager. However, without considering any of these, Ext.P8 order has been passed stating that all the four students who were found absent on both the visits are to be treated as bogus admissions. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on Exts.P9 to P12 documents to show that all the four students had actually been studying in the school on the relevant dates and that there was no error in Ext.P1 staff fixation. Further, along with the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner, Exts.P16 and P16(a) copies of attendance register of the 5[th] respondent were also produced to show that the two students made mention of in Ext.P8 were actually studying in the school even after the date of inspection by the Super Check Cell and had been promoted to the higher classes also in the same school. The learned counsel for the petitioner would also place reliance on a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in **Kishore v. State of Kerala and others** [2019 (4) KLT 153] to contend that the petitioner cannot be charged with any financial liability in view of the fact that he was not the class teacher of the standards in which bogus admissions were found. ``` WP(C) NO.12010 OF 2021 ``` ``` 5 ``` 6. A counter affidavit has been placed on record by the 4[th] respondent stating that the Super Check Cell, which inspected the school on 30.07.2019 and 20.02.2020, found that four students were absent on both the visits and it was found that two of such students were continuing their studies in their former school and that the class teacher of Std.II in the Karayad A.L.P. School was marking attendance in the school without their physical presence in the school. It was further found that Niya Fathima, another student, was removed after the 6[th] working day from the school and readmitted to the school on 29.08.2019. It was found that she was not present in the school till 29.08.2019. It is stated that Tabassum Parveen, who was resident from another State, had been removed for long absence. It is further submitted that disciplinary action has been taken against the class teacher of Std.II and the Headmaster of the school and that one post of one division is reduced. 7. The specific contention of the petitioner is that if the documents which are now produced are taken into consideration, it would be clear that there was actually no bogus admissions as claimed by the Super ``` WP(C) NO.12010 OF 2021 ``` ``` 6 ``` Check Cell. It is stated that the two students, that is Karthika R.S. And Vyga A.M., had never taken admission in any other school and had continued in the school in question and have been promoted to higher classes. With regard to the other two students, it is contended that Niya Fathima had actually been readmitted to the school and that there is no dispute with regard to this issue. It is therefore contended that the readmission is liable to be taken into account as per Ext.P13 Government Order for the purpose of preventing existing teachers and non teaching staff from being removed. With regard to Tabassum Parveen, it is contended that the student had actually been enrolled in the school, had been issued with a transfer certificate and had been removed from the rolls of the school for continued absence only on 09.10.2019. It is therefore contended that there was no bogus admission as stated and that the finding in the impugned orders are therefore completely erroneous and requires a reconsideration. 8. Having considered the contentions advanced on either side, I notice that there is no finding either in the orders of the DGE or the Government Order that the first two students, that is Karthika R.S and ``` WP(C) NO.12010 OF 2021 ``` ``` 7 ``` Vyga A.M., had secured admission in any other school at the relevant time. The only contention is that they were absent on the two days while the Super Check Cell conducted inspections and that they were found in another school. In the absence of any contention that they were admitted in the other school, I am of the opinion that the explanation prepared by the Manager is liable to be considered on its merits. With regard to the other two students also, it appears that one of the students had been readmitted to the school and the contention of the petitioner that the benefit of Ext.P13 ought to have been extended in respect of the said student has not been considered by the respondents. Further, with regard to the fourth student also, it is contended by the Manager that the removal of the student was only on 09.10.2019. If that be so, the said contention also requires a consideration at the hands of the respondents. 9. In view of the fact that these aspects have not been properly considered by the respondents, the impugned orders, that is Exts.P4 and P8, are set aside. There will be a direction to the 2[nd] respondent to consider the report of the Super Check Cell as well as the explanations ``` WP(C) NO.12010 OF 2021 ``` ``` 8 ``` submitted by the Manager to the same in the light of Exts.P9 to P11 as well as Ext.P16 and to pass fresh orders in accordance with law. The applicability of Ext.P13 Government Order to the case of Niya Fathima who was readmitted to the school shall also be considered. Further, in case it is found that the two students, that is Karthika R.S and Vyga A.M, had not taken admission in any other school and had continued in the school in question, they shall not be treated as bogus admission only due to the fact that they were found absent on the dates of the visits by the Super Check Cell. Appropriate orders shall be passed after hearing all concerned and after considering the contentions within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To facilitate a proper consideration, the petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of this judgment before the respondents. This writ petition is ordered accordingly. ## **`Sd/-`** ## **`ANU SIVARAMAN`** ## **`JUDGE`** ``` NP ``` ``` WP(C) NO.12010 OF 2021 ``` ``` 9 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12010/2021`** |**`PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS`**|| |---|---| |**`Exhibit P1`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION OF THE`**| ||**`SCHOOL ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED`**| ||**`16.07.2019.`**| |**`Exhibit P2`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED`**| ||**`12.06.2018 AND THE ORDER OF APPROVAL OF THE`**| ||**`PETITIONER.`**| |**`Exhibit P3`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE`**| ||**`HEADMASTER TO THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND`**| ||**`RESPONDENT DATED 12.08.2020.`**| |**`Exhibit P4`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.S.C/97/2020/K.K.D`**| ||**`ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED`**| ||**`04.02.2021.`**| |**`Exhibit P5`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B3/11516/2020`**| ||**`ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED`**| ||**`19.02.2021.`**| |**`Exhibit P6`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D/120094/2021 OF`**| ||**`THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 16.02.2021.`**| |**`Exhibit P7`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION FILED B THE 5TH`**| ||**`RESPONDENT DATED 12.02.2021.`**| |**`Exhibit P8`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.2622/2021/G.EDN`**| ||**`ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED`**| ||**`20.04.2021.`**| |**`Exhibit P9`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE TC ISSUED BY VILAYATTUR`**| ||**`ELAMBILAD MUP SCHOOL (KARTHIKA R.S)`**| |**`Exhibit P9(A)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE TC ISSUED BY VILAYATTUR`**| ||**`ELAMBILAD MUP SCHOOL (VAIGA A.M).`**| |**`Exhibit P10`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR`**| ||**`ADMISSION TO THE SCHOOL KARTHIKA R.S.`**| |**`Exhibit P10(A)`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR`**| ||**`ADMISSION TO THE SCHOOL VAIGA A.M.`**| |**`Exhibit P11`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION`**| ||**`OF TABSSUM PARVEEN DATED 30.05.2019.`**| |**`Exhibit P12`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE`**| ||**`ATTENDANCE REGISTER.`**| |**`Exhibit P13`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS)NO.284/96/G.EDN`**| ||**`DATED 11.09.1996.`**| |**`Exhibit P14`**|**`A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN`**| ||**`WP(C)NO.24799/2007 DATED 18.11.2009.`**| |**`EXHIBIT-P15`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER OF`**| ||**`STANDARD IV DURING THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2019-20`**| ``` 10 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO.12010 OF 2021`** ``` EXHIBIT-P16TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER OF KARAYAD LP SCHOOL FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 OF STANDARD III A EXHIBIT-P16(a)TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER OF KARAYAD LP SCHOOL FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 OF STANDARD III B ``` ``` RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS: NIL ```