Kerala High Court
Sanjeev vs The Principal Secretary
Author: P.R. Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/10TH BHADRA, 1936
WP(C).No. 20469 of 2014 (G)
----------------------------
PETITIONER:
--------------------------
SANJEEV,AGED 41 YEARS,
S/O.SAHADEVA KURUP, SREE VIHAR, KULASEKHARAM,
KODUNGANUR P.O., VALLIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.KULATHOOR S.V.PREMAKUMARAN NAIR
SRI.R.T.PRADEEP
RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------
1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
3. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
4. MANAGER,
B.N.V. VOCATIONAL AND HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL &
VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL FOR GIRLS,
THIRUVALLOM-695 027.
5. MALLIKA.S.,
HSA (MATHS)
B.N.V.VOCATIONAL AND HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
THIRUVALLOM-695 027.
6. DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL,
NCC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.A.FAYAZ
R4 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM
R5 BY ADVS. SRI.B.S.SIVAJI
SRI.V.R.SWAMINATHAN
R6 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASG OF INDIA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Kss
WP(C).No. 20469 of 2014 (G)
-----------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
---------------------------------------
EXT.P1: COPY OF ORDER OF SUSPENSION DATED 19.10.2013 BY 4TH
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P2: COPY OF ORDER DATED 11.11.2013 BY 3RD RESPONDENT BY
CANCELLING THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT.
EXT.P3: COPY OF ORDER DATED 13.11.2013 BY 4TH RESPONDENT REINSTATING
THE PETITIONER BACK TO SERVICE.
EXT.P4: COPY OF INSTRUCTION OF TRANSFER OF ANO'S AS CONTAINED IN
LETTER OF GOVERNMENT DATED 7.6.2000.
EXT.P5: COPY OF LETTER DATED 3.6.2002 BY GOVERNMENT.
EXT.P6: COPY OF LETTER DATED 11.5.2005 BY GOVERNMENT.
EXT.P7: COPY OF ORDER DATED 11.6.2014 BY WHICH MUTUAL TRANSFER OF
PETITIONER AND 5TH RESPONDENT EFFECTED BY 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXT.P8: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 19.6.2014 BEFORE 6TH
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P9: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 16.7.2014 BEFORE 4TH
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
------------------------------------------ N I L
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
Kss
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.20469 of 2014
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 01st day of September, 2014.
JUDGMENT
The correctness and sustainability of Ext.P7 order of transfer, whereby the petitioner has been shifted from B.N.V. Vocational & Higher Secondary School to the nearby Vocational Higher Secondary School for Girls, Thiruvallam belonging to the 4th respondent Manager, is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner is working as HSA (Maths) and is also in charge of the NCC Unit being the Associate NCC Officer. By virtue of the relevant norms stipulated by the Government as per Ext.P4, the teacher, who is functioning as Associate NCC Officer is liable to be retained in the same School. It is also pointed out that, if at all the transfer becomes inevitable, it shall only be to such a place where an NCC Unit available and the post of Associate NCC Officer is there, to accommodate such transferee.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that, though both the Schools are functioning in the nearby premises, W.P.C.No.20469 of 2014 2 there is no vacancy of Associate NCC Officer in the Girls School, to which the petitioner has been transferred as per Ext.P7. This forms the grievance projected by way of Ext.P9 before the 4th respondent Manager. It is also brought to the notice of this Court, that the petitioner is not in a position to agitate the matter by approaching the DPI, as the scope of consideration before the said authority is very limited, especially with regard to the seniority and that alone. The other aspects can be considered only by the 6th respondent and it is in the said circumstances, that the petitioner has filed Ext.P8 before the 2nd respondent. The prayer is to cause the same to be considered and disposed of within a reasonable time.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent Manager, the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent, who came to be posted in the place from where the petitioner was shifted and also the learned Central Government counsel appearing on behalf of the 6th respondent, besides the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 and 2.
W.P.C.No.20469 of 2014 3
5. After hearing both the sides, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 6th respondent to consider Ext.P6 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned, as expeditiously as possible, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the 6th respondent, for further steps.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp