Kerala High Court
Rajeesh R.Chandran vs District Educational Officer on 2 August, 1995
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2016/10TH SRAVANA, 1938
WP(C).No. 15353 of 2016 (T)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
------------------------
RAJEESH R.CHANDRAN,
HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT,A.K.K.R.H.S FOR BOYS,
CHELANUR,KOZHIKODE.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN
SMT.THUSHARA.V
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
--------------------------
1. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
KOZHIKODE,OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
KOZHIKODE,PIN-673001.
2. MANAGER,
A.K.K.R.H.S FOR BOYS & A.K.K.R.H.S FOR GIRLS,CHELANUR,
KOZHIKODE,PIN-673616.
3. SMT.SATHI.K.V,
HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT,A.K.K.R.H.S HIGHER SECONDARY FOR
GIRLS,CHELANUR,KOZHIKODE.(NOWQ PROMOTED AS HEADMISTRESS)
PIN-673616.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
R2 BY ADV. SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI
R3 BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN
R3 BY ADV. KUM.ANJU CLETUS
R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.BEENA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
01-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 15353 of 2016 (T)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE DEGREE CERTIFICATE IN B.SC(CHEMISTRY)OF THE
PETITIONER
P1(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE IN BACHELOR OF EDUCATION,
M.SC OF THE PETITIONER
P1(B) :TRUE COPY OF DEGREE CERTIFICATE IN M.SC(CHEMISTRY)OF THE PETITIONER
P1(C) :TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE BY DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY
EDUCATION FOR STATE ELIGIBILITY TEST QUALIFICATION
P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER RELATING TO THE PETITIONER AS
UPSA,ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 2/8/1995 WITHG ENDORSEMENT OF
APPROVAL BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
2(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER RELATING TO THE PETIIONER AS
UPSA,ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 1/11/1995 WITH ENDORSEMENT OF
APPROVAL BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
P2(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER RELATING TO THE PETITIONER AS
UPSA,ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15/7/1996 WITH ENDORSEMENT OF
APPROVAL BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
P2(C) : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER RELATING TO THE PETITIONER AS
HSA,ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 1/6/1998 WITH ENDORSEMENT OF
APPROVAL BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
P2(D) : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER RELATING TO THE PETITIONER AS
HSA,ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 7/6/2000 WITH ENDORSEMENT OF
APPROVAL BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
P2(E) : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 2/6/2003
P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION FOR ACCOUNT TEST (LOWER)TO THE PETITIONER
P3(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION FOR ACCOUNT TEST (HIGHER) TO THE PETITIONER.
P3(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION FOR DEPARTMENT TEST (KERALA EDUCATION ACT & RULES)TO THE
PETITIONER
P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O.117/2015 G.EDN. DATED
16.5.2015
P4(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS)157/15.G.EDN DATED 10.6.2015
P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTIONED LEAVE ORDER OF THE PETITIONER BY
GOVERNMENT ORDERS DATED 31.3.2008
-2-
P5(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTIONED LEAVE ORDER OF THE PETITIONER BY
GOVERNMENT ORDERS DATED 2/2/2011
P5(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTIONED LEAVE ORDER OF THE PETITIONER BY
GOVERNMENT ORDERS DATED 30.6.2014
P5(C): TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTIONED LEAVE ORDER OF THE PETITIONER BY
GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 15/7/2002
P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE CLAIM APPLICATION DATED 29.2.2016,BY THE PETITIONER
CLAIMING PROMOTION TO THE POST HM.ALONG WITH EMAIL FORWARDING REPORT
P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER GIVEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO
THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY WAY OF ORDER DATED 28.3.2016
P8 : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 6/4/2016 BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
R2(A) : COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE APPROVED SENIORITY LIST FOR
THE BOYS SCHOOLS AND GIRLS SCHOOL PUBLISHED ON 01.01.2013.
R2(B) : COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(RT)NO.446/11/G.EDN. DATED
02.02.2011.
R2(C) : COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO.(RT)NO.446/11/EDN.DATED
02.02.2011.
R2(D) : COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF DEPARTMENTAL TEST IN KER ISSUED BY THE
KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
R2(E) : COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF DEPARTMENTAL TEST IN ACCOUNT TEST
ISSUED BY THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
R3(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KPSC TO 3RD
RESPONDENT.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE
sm
K.HARILAL, J.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
W.P.(C). No.13530 of 2009
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Dated this the 30th day of August, 2016
JUDGMENT
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The grievance of the petitioner is that the 1st
respondent has been excavating earth and filling
paddy fields and streams, in violation of Ext.P3 order,
and the respondents No.2 to 8 have not taken any
action against the 1st respondent. Even though the
petitioner had preferred Ext.P8 representation before
the 3rd respondent, the same has not been considered
so far.
2. Having regard to the grievance of the
petitioner, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider
and pass orders on Ext.P8 representation, if the same
has not been considered so far, within a period of two
months from today.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
K.HARILAL,
Judge.
okb
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/14TH SRAVANA, 1938
WP(C).No. 14250 of 2016 (E)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
M.K.MANOJAN
CHAIRMAN, E.K.C.M EDUCATIONAL TRUST, AROOR P.O,
KAKKATTIL VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, 673 507.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.RAVINDRAN (SR.)
SRI.SREEDHAR RAVINDRAN
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
673 504.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.P.PADMALAYAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
05-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 14250 of 2016 (E)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DATED 27-10-04 OF THE PURAMERI
BLOCK PANCHAYATH.
P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DATED 30-4-04 OF THE THUNERI
GRAMA PANCHAYATH.
P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7-1-2005 OF THE CHAIRMAN,
STANDING COMMITTEE FOR EDUCATION & HEALTH, KOZHIKODE.
P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE CHAIRMAN, WELFARE
STANDING COMMITTEE VELAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 20-1-05.
P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY E.K.NANU, PRESIDENT,
VELAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH DT 22-1-05.
P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OF EDUCATION TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19-1-2005
P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE DEO, VADAKARA ALONG WITH
SURVEY REPORT DATED 10-1-05.
P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DATED 25-8-05.
P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24-1-06 IN WPC.NO.
28013/05.
P10: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT DATED
29.03.2006.
P11: TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE DEO, VADAKARA
DATED 23.07.2007.
P12: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
DATED 06.05.2014.
P13: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.10.2014 IN W.P.(C).NO.
26038/2014
P14: TRUE COPY OF THE FORM NO.III SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
DATED 25.08.2014
P15: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
P16: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 11.05.2016
P17: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
DATED 08.07.2016
P18: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE DEO TO THE DPI DATED 11.07.16
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
-----------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE
sm
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C).Nos.16605/2013, 28621/2013 & 3711/2015
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 9th Day of June, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The short question in these writ petitions is with regard to the notification issued by the Travancore Devaswom Board inviting applications for various posts under the Board. The point for consideration is whether the appointments from the list are only to be made in respect of the vacancies referred in the notification or for all the vacancies to be arisen during the currency of the list.
2. The writ petitioners are applicants who are included in the rank list prepared for appointment as temple employees such as Watcher, Kazhakom, Thali etc. They allege that in spite of large number of vacancies in the notified posts, the Board is withholding W.P.(C).No.16605/2013 & connected cases -:2:- appointments to the candidates who are included in the list. It is further submitted that the Board is engaging temporary hands to discharge the duties of the temple employees on daily wages. They rely on the information obtained from the Public Information Officer under the Right to Information Act regarding current vacancies (See Ext.P16 produced in W.P.(C) No.16605/2013).
3. There were various orders passed by this Court directing the Board to furnish the details of the vacancies. The stand of the Board at the relevant point of time was that the identification of vacancies could be possible only on completion of redeployment. Thereafter, a statement was filed on 05/03/2015 showing the sanctioned posts, redeployment to be made and excess post to which redeployment is to be made.
4. The essential dispute now urged before this Court is with regard to non-fulfilment of the posts which are admittedly available for appointment. The W.P.(C).No.16605/2013 & connected cases -:3:- list was published on 09/07/2012. The validity of the rank list is three years from the above date.
5. The learned Standing Counsel Shri A.N.Rajan Babu appearing for the Board would submit that the Board is not bound to appoint any of the candidates over and above the notified vacancies. It is further submitted that the Board would appoint all selected candidates and who are included in the rank list for the unfilled notified vacancies. However, it is admitted that as against the notified vacancies of 54 Watchers, they have appointed 94 candidates and if the Court directs, they are prepared to undo the appointments made in excess of the notified vacancies.
6. The learned counsel Shri D.Somasundaram and other counsel for the petitioners submit that in the notification, the reference is only made to the number of vacancies which were available for appointment at the time of notification. Since validity of the list is for three years, reference to any vacancies in the W.P.(C).No.16605/2013 & connected cases -:4:- notification have no relevance. It is submitted that all the vacancies which arise during the validity of the rank list will have to be filled in accordance with the ranking of the candidates in the list.
7. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the Board Shri A.N.Rajan Babu submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court have deprecated appointment of candidates in excess of the notified vacancies.
8. In the backdrop of the fact of submissions, this Court has to consider the purport of the notification. The notification only refers to the fact of present available vacancies. Nowhere it indicates that notified vacancies are exhaustive vacancies and the selection is only for definite number of vacancies notified. The reference to the present vacancies in the notification coupled with the fact that the list has validity for three years from 09/07/2012 clearly indicates that the intention was to fill all the W.P.(C).No.16605/2013 & connected cases -:5:- vacancies that would arise during the currency of the list. If the list has no life span, there is no necessity to fix life span of three years. As rightly pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel Shri A.N.Rajan Babu, no appointments can be made in excess of the notified vacancies, if notified vacancies are determined in advance. However, in this case, the invitation for applications was not on pre-quantified vacancies but for all the vacancies to be arisen during the currency of the list.
9. The advertisement inviting applications for selection, is equally binding upon the organisation inviting applications as well as the applicants. The fact as has been noted is that the advertisement was not for specified number of vacancies but for all the vacancies during the validity of the list including available vacancies which were notified at the time of issuance of notification.
W.P.(C).No.16605/2013 & connected cases -:6:-
10. Thus, these writ petitions are disposed directing the Board to appoint all the candidates before expiry of the list in the substantive vacancies that have arisen during the currency of the list. No costs.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ms