Kerala High Court
S.P.Biju vs Chief Commissioner Of Travancore on 15 June, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. MANJULA CHELLUR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/26TH ASWINA 1934
WA.No. 1207 of 2010 ( )
-----------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC.31401/2009 DATED 15-06-2010
APPELLANT(S):
------------
S.P.BIJU
S/O. K.PADMANABHAVAN UNNI, AGED 37 YEARS
SELVA NIVAS (HOUSE) CHERTHALAI PO, ALAPPUZHA DT
PIN 688 524
BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF TRAVANCORE
DEVASWOM BOARD, GOVT SECRETARIT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1
2. THE COMMISSIONER
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD OFFICE, NANTHANCODE
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE CULTURAL DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE OF CULTURE
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
4. JAYADAS P.G, S/O.THANKAMMA A.M,
AGED 27 YEARS, ARACKAL HOUSE, VENGOOR PO
KURUPPAMPADY, PERUMBAVOOR ERNAKULAM DT PIN 683 546
R1-R3 BY ADV. SRI.SRI.G.BIJU, SC, TDB
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-10-2012, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J
&
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
----------------------------------------------
W.A.No. 1207 of 2010
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of October, 2012
JUDGMENT
Manjula Chellur, C.J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 to 3.
2. We notice from the order sheet that though the fourth respondent, who was the writ petitioner, was served as early as 10.9.2012, he has not made any attempt either to appear in person or represent through a counsel. The fourth respondent/writ petitioner approached learned Single Judge aggrieved by the selection process made by the respondent authorities while selecting the appellant to the post of Music Teacher in pursuance of Exhibit P6 notification. Exhibit P6 has all the details required for the post of Music Teacher so as to allow prospective applicants to apply for the said post. As per this notification, there were two posts available at Vaikom and Attingal Kshethra Kalapeedam, which come under the Travancore Devaswom Board. Payment is WA.1207/10 2 daily allowance of Rs.140/-. Eligibility to apply is S.S.L.C or pass in equivalent examination, so also Degree in Carnatic Music from a recognized University. In the alternative, applicants with pass in Ganabhooshanam/Ganapraveena or certificate in minimum 5 years study under Gurukula Sikshana Sampradayam are also entitled to apply. Apart from this basic qualification, other requirements like experience etc. was also sought from the prospective applicants. Appellant as well as fourth respondent along with another person applied and were interviewed by the selection committee constituted for purpose of selection of two Music Teachers for the above said institutions.
3. According to the writ petitioner, he has required qualification of S.S.L.C and Degree in Music, apart from required experience. His grievance is that he has all the required qualifications while the appellant/fourth respondent did not possess required qualification, as he has passed examination in Ganabhooshanam with the core subject Violin and not Carnatic Vocal. The main contention of fourth respondent/writ petitioner is, the present appellant did not possess qualification in Carnatic Vocal, therefore, he was ineligible for selection and he substantiates this contention by producing certificate from RLV WA.1207/10 3 College of Music, where the appellant had secured his Ganabhooshanam certificate.
4. The stand of respondents 3 and 4 before learned Single Judge was to the effect that writ petitioner was ineligible and fourth respondent alone was eligible for the said post. According to them, pass in Ganabhooshanam Diploma in Vocal Music or Ganabhooshanam Diploma in Violin/Veena conducted by the Commissioner for Government Examinations, Kerala has been recognized as a qualification for Music Teacher, therefore, appellant/fourth respondent was eligible for the post of Music Teacher. Exhibit R4(3) is the certificate belonging to fourth respondent to substantiate the claim of appellant that he was eligible to apply to the said post in terms of notification at Exhibit P6. Appellant, having passed practical Ganabhooshanam Examination held in June, 1998 in Second Class and Theory of Music/Mridangam and Sanskrit in Third Class. Based on this merit, he was awarded Diploma of Ganabhooshanam in Vocal Music/Violin. Exhibit P6 notification refers to pass in Ganabhooshanam or Ganapraveena. The question here is whether the core subject of the appellant being Violin, will it not be equated with a certificate in Carnatic Vocal ? WA.1207/10 4
5. Learned Single Judge proceeded on the premise that Carnatic Vocal is entirely different from Carnatic Violin. This ultimately led to wrong conclusion. As a matter of fact, Carnatic Music is one form of music and the other form is Hindustani Music. Whether it is vocal or instrumental, other than percussion instrument, the lessons taught from basics till Vidwath are one and the same. It could be through regular Music College like any other Degree or Post Graduate Degree or it could be through recognized forms of teaching like Ganabhooshanam or Ganapraveena. In each State this certificate could be named differently depending upon the authority, who conducts the examination. Apparently, there is no dispute so far as the appellant having S.S.L.C certificate. The only dispute is with regard to qualification in Carnatic Music. Strictly speaking, Exhibit P6 only says pass in Ganabhooshanam in Carnatic Music. It does not further clarify whether it should be Vocal or Violin. A Violin expert in Carnatic Music or any other expert in any other instrument, who has done Carnatic Music can very well teach Vocal in Carnatic Music. In the absence of any specific requirement indicated at Exhibit P6 that he must have a pass in Ganabhooshanam only in Carnatic Vocal, there was no impediment WA.1207/10 5 for selecting appellant to the post in question. Even otherwise, the selection committee consists of Cultural Director of Devaswom Board, apart from one Sri.Vaikam Venu, an artist in percussion (Mridangam).
6. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion, learned Single Judge was not justified in saying, the appellant was not eligible in terms of Exhibit P6 notification to be selected to the post of Music Teacher in terms of Exhibit P6. It is well settled that when an expert body on a particular subject says the candidate was qualified, the Court, which is not an expert in the particular subject, cannot substitute its opinion, unless there is substantiating material for the same. Accordingly, the judgment of learned Single Judge is set aside and the Writ Appeal is allowed.
MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE vgs19.10