High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2021-03-04Petition allowed; orders quashed; no recovery a...

MINIMOL J. v. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020(N)

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Devan Ramachandran
Judgment Date: 2021-03-04
Court Decision / Holding: The writ petition is allowed. Exts P2–P5, P9, P12, P13, P19 and Ext P20 are set aside, and no action to recover any amounts from the petitioner based on the 2007–2008 bogus admissions claim will be taken in future. The court directs termination of the recovery actions.
Final Disposition: Petition allowed; orders quashed; no recovery action to be taken; matter disposed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

MINIMOL J., aged 42 years, W/o. PETER R, H.S.A (Natural Science), St. Agnes' Girls High School, Neendakara, Kollam

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by its Secretary to Government, General Education Department, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram
The Director of General Education, Jagathy, Thiruvananthuram
The Deputy Director of Education, Thevally P.O., Kollam
The District Educational Officer, Kollam
The Corporate Educational Agency, Corporate Manager of Catholic Schools, Bishop's House, Thangasseri, Kollam

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri B. Mohanlal

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri P.M. Manoj, Sr. GP
• Sri John Joseph Vettikad
• Sri C. Joseph Johny

Case Synopsis & Summary

MINIMOL J., a High School Teacher of Natural Science at St. Agnes' Girls High School, Neendakara (managed by the Corporate Educational Agency), challenges orders directing her to pay Rs 55,468 under the Kerala Education Rules for alleged bogus admissions in the 2007–2008 academic year at St. Antony's Higher Secondary School, Kanjiramcode. The petitioner asserts she never worked at St. Antony's during the relevant period and therefore cannot be liable for admissions or any supposed loss. She relies on Kishore V.G. v. State of Kerala (2019(4) KLT 153), which this Court has read to require due procedure before any recovery action against a teacher. Respondents claim that the petitioner was involved in boosting pupil strength at St. Antony's during that year and that the authorities rightly directed payment of the sum; the counter affidavit contends that the petitioner was actually posted at St. Joseph's High School, Sakthikulangara, about 30 km away, and could not have participated in the alleged admissions. On evaluation, the Court concludes that the recovery cannot stand where the petitioner’s connection to the school in question during 2007–2008 is not established and where no due process under KER was followed. Observing Kishore V.G., the court sets aside the challenged orders and directs that no recovery action be pursued against the petitioner in the future, emphasizing the need for procedural compliance in public recoveries.

Provisions of Law Cited

Kerala Education Rules (KER)Rule 12 F of Chapter XXIII KER

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Due procedure under Kerala Education Rules (KER) is required before recovery actions against teachers.
Recovery actions against teachers for bogus admissions must follow due process under KER.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends she never worked at St. Antony's Higher Secondary School, Kanjiramcode during 2007–2008 and cannot be held liable for alleged bogus admissions or the directed monetary recovery. She argues that the recovery orders (Exts P2–P5, P9, P12, P13, P19) are without due process under the Kerala Education Rules (KER). Relying on Kishore V.G. v. State of Kerala (Supra), she asserts that no such proceedings were initiated against her, and thus the action must be terminated. The manager's counter-affidavit clarifies she was at St. Joseph's High School, Sakthikulangara, not at St. Antony's; the substantial distance undermines the assertion of involvement. The petitioner seeks quashing of the orders and a declaration that no recovery action be taken in the future.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend the petitioner was involved in inflating student numbers at St. Antony's during the 2007-08 academic year, thereby contributing to bogus admissions and financial loss, justifying recovery. They argue that Exts P2–P5, P9, P12, P13, P19 are valid and the petition should be dismissed. They maintain that the authorities relied on the evidence and the need to recover funds to safeguard public exchequer, and that due process under KER was not violated in spirit if not in form.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Kishore V.G. v. State of Kerala and Others	2019(4) KLT 153	Positive	The court relies on Kishore V.G. (Supra) to affirm that recovery actions against teachers for bogus admissions must follow due procedure under the Kerala Education Rules; in its absence, the action is untenable.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against MINIMOL J. v. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** ## **THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020(N)** ## **PETITIONER:** **MINIMOL J., AGED 42 YEARS** **W/O. PETER R, H.S.A (NATURAL SCIENCE), ST.AGNE'S GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL, NEENDAKARA, KOLLAM 691582, RESIDING AT ANU VILLA(LONA BHAVAN), AZHEEKAL P.O, PRAYAR, KOLLAM.** **BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.** - **2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 691014.** - **3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THEVALLAY P O, KOLLAM - 691009.** - **4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION P O, KOLLAM - 691013.** - **5 THE CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, CORPORATE MANAGER OF CATHOLIC SCHOOLS, BISHOP'S HOUSE, THANGASSERI, KOLLAM - 691007.** **R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER R5 BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD R5 BY ADV. SRI.C.JOSEPH JOHNY** ## **SRI.P.M.MANOJ-SR.GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020 2** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner, who is presently working as a High School Teacher (HST) in Natural Science in 'St. Agne's Girls High School', Neendakara, which is managed by the 5[th] respondent – Corporate Educational Manager, has approached this Court impugning Exts.P2 to P5, P9, P12, P13 and P19 orders, to the extent to which, she has been mulcted with the liability of Rs.55,468/- and has been directed to pay the same in instalments. 2. The petitioner says that the liability imposed against her is based on the allegation that while she was working in 'St.Antony's Higher Secondary School', Kanjiramcode, during the Academic Year 2007-2008, certain bogus admissions were made, which led to an additional division in Std.IX to be sanctioned and that the Super Check Cell thereafter found this to be illegal. **WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020 3** 3. The petitioner says that the allegations against her are _per se_ untenable, since she had never worked in 'St.Antony's Higher Secondary School', Kanjiramcode, either during the period in question or any time before or after that; and therefore, that factually, even if it is assumed that there is any truth on the allegations of bogus admissions, she cannot be found liable either to pay the money or in having made such admissions. She adds that, in any event of the matter, on account of the affirmative declarations of this Court in _**Kishore V.G. v. State of Kerala and Others**_ **[2019(4) KLT 153],** no action could have been initiated against her for recovery, as has been done through the afore orders. 4. Shri.John Joseph Vettikad, learned counsel appearing for the 5[th] respondent – Corporate Manager, affirmed the afore submissions and added that a counter ## **WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020 4** affidavit has been filed by his client, wherein the following has been stated: “3. The allegation against the petitioner is that she was instrumental for boosting up of the students strength in St.Antony's Higher Secondary School, Kanjiracode during the year 2007-2008 which culminated in sanctioning of one additional division in standard IX along with post of High School Teacher (Natural Science). It is pertinent to note that the petitioner had never worked in St.Antony's Higher Secondary School, Kanjiracode in her career. She was working in St.Joseph High School, Sakthikulangara as High School Teacher (Natural Science) and she could not have involved in any manner in the alleged boosting up of strength of pupil in St.Antony's Higher Secondary School, Kanjiracode which is almost 30 kilometers away from St.Joseph High School, Sakthikulangara. This factual position was never considered by the Government in the Rule 12 F of Chapter XXIII KER Revision filed by me.” 5. He, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed. 6. The learned Senior Government Pleader - Shri.P.M.Manoj, submitted that liability against the petitioner was fixed taking note of the fact that she was also working in 'St.Antony's Higher Secondary School', Kanjiramcode, during the Academic Year 2007-2008 and that she was also responsible, along with other teachers, in having contributed to the bogus admissions, **WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020 5** thus causing loss to the exchequer. He, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed. 7. When I evaluate the afore submissions, it is indubitable that whatever be the allegations now made by the competent Authorities, the petitioner can be found guilty only if she had atleast worked in 'St.Antony's Higher Secondary School', Kanjiramcode, during the Academic Year 2007-2008. The Manager has averred in the afore extracted portion of his counter affidavit that the petitioner never worked in the said School in her career and that at the relevant time, she was working in 'St.Joseph High School', Sakthikulangara, as a High School Teacher. It is pertinent that the distance between these two Schools is nearly 30 kms, but the Authority still appear to have taken that these two Schools are the same. **WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020 6** 8. I cannot, therefore, find the action taken against the petitioner to be tenable noticing the afore facts, which are specifically pleaded by the petitioner but not controverted by any of the official respondents. 9. That apart, as rightly submitted by Shri.B.Mohan Lal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it has been well declared by this Court in _**Kishore V.G.**_ **(S** _**u**_ **pra),** that recovery action against the teacher of a School in which bogus admissions are found cannot be initiated without following due procedure under the Kerala Education Rules (KER for short); and since it is clear that no such proceedings had even been initiated against the petitioner, all action against her will have to be now directed to be terminated. **==> picture [332 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** particular being guided by the decision in ## **WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020 7** _**Kishore V.G.**_ **(S** _**u**_ **pra),** I order this writ petition and set aside Exts.P2 to P5, P9, P12, P13 and P19 orders as also Ext.P20 notice issued by the various Authorities under the KER; and order that no action to recover any amounts from the petitioner based on the allegation that she had contributed to the bogus admissions for the Academic Year 2007-2008 in 'St.Antony's Higher Secondary School', Kanjiramcode, will be taken in future. **Sd/-** **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **JUDGE** **MC/9.3.2021** **WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020 8** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DISABILITY CERTIFICATE DATED 09.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL BOARD, TALUK HEADQUARTERS HOSPITAL, KARUNAGAPPALY TO THE PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NO.SC. (1)40051/08/DPI/D.DIS DATED 17.09.2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B34669/08/D.DIS DATED 25.10.2008 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NO B3/4669/08 DATED 28.04.2009 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 5733/A3/2010/G.EDN DATED 05.02.2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.02.2017 IN WP(C) NO. 25025/2009 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.01.2012 IN WP(C) NO. 37037/2010 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE WA NO.2112/2012 DATED 26.02.2014 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 34025/J2/12/G/EDN DATED 21.06.2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.OA1(2) 17694/10 DATED 25.03.2013 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.10.2017 IN WP(C) NO. 11510/2013 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P12 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A3/324/2017/G.EDN DATED 13.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B3/4669/2008** ## **WP(C).No.20935 OF 2020 9** **DATED 03.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE GO(P) NO. 199/2011/G.EDN DATED 01.10.2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P15 THE TRUE COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO. 5753/11/G.EDN DATED 23.12.2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P16 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.11.2018 IN WP(C) NO. 23913/2018 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.** - **EXHIBIT P17 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B3/5032/2018 DATED 27.09.2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P18 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.12.2019 IN CONTEMPT CASE (C) NO.2389/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.** - **EXHIBIT P19 THE TRUE COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO.5253/2019/2019/G.EDN DATED 30.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P20 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO CHARGES NO.113/2020/EDN DATED 11.09.2020 AND STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** - **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.8.2019 IN W.A.NO 2552/2015 OF DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.**