Decided on June 04,1993

K.J.SULATHA Appellant
STATE Respondents


- (1.)A vacancy in the post of clerk arise in Mutharamman Coil High School, Kottukalkonam, Neyyattinkara on 1-1-1984. Who is the rightful claimant to the above post, is the issue raised in these three original petitions. It was therefore agreed by all parties that the above three original petitions could be heard and disposed off together. While in O. P. 656/90 and 7737/90, Government order dated 15-1-90 issued in exercise of its power under R.92 of Chap.14A of Kerala Education Rules under challenge in toto, in O. P. 2005/90 challenge is restricted only to a portion of the order. Since almost all the relevant documents are produced in O. P. 7737/90 reference is made to exhibits as marked in O. P. 7737/90.
(2.)Petitioner in O. P. 7737/90 is the manager of the school. It is alleged that the educational agency is Hindu Nadar Mahajana Sangham, a Society registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Act, 1955. The President of the Sangham is the exofficio manager of the school. In the permanent vacancy of a Clerk which arise on 1-1-84, the Manager appointed one Sulatha, petitioner in O. P. 656/90 on 16-1-84. N. Thankamani, petitioner in O. P. 2005/90 was working as a full time menial in the above school from 7-6-78 onwards. He acquired SSLC qualification in March, 1983. It was contended by Thankamani that he was fully qualified and entitled to be promoted as Clerk in the vacancy which arose on 1-1-84 in accordance with the relevant rules and therefore the appointment of Sulatha, daughter Of the Manager was illegal. The District Educational Officer refused to grant approval of appointment of Sulatha by Ext. P11 proceedings dated 24-2-84, on the ground that Thankamani had a legal claim for being promoted to the post. Aggrieved by the above order the Manager filed an appeal before the Deputy Director. Ext. P12 dated 30-3-84 is the Memorandum of Appeal. The appeal was allowed by the Deputy Director under Ext. P13 proceedings dated 20-6-84 relying on a letter of the Director of Public Instruction dated 15-2-1984 to the effect, that so long as no amendment has been issued to Rules in Chap.24B, the non teaching staff appointed after 1-10-64 are not entitled to get the benefit of amendment issued in G. O. (P) No. 132/82/G. Edn. dated 17-9-82. The above order was challenged by Thankamani by way of a revision under R.92 of Chap.14A of K.E.R. before the 1st respondent. The Manager filed Ext. P14 objection before the Government in the above revision" petition
(3.)By a detailed order dated 15-1-90 evidenced by Ext. P15, the Ist respondent allowed the revision petition and held that Thankamani was the rightful claimant for the vacancy which arose on 1-4-84 and the appointment of Sulatha was against the Rules. The Manager was directed to appoint Thankamani against the post of Clerk in the school immediately terminating the service of Sulatha. The District Educational Officer was further directed to take immediately action to disburse the salary due to Sulatha for the period in which she had actually worked. Thankamani, Petitioner in O.P. 2005/90 challenges the above direction regarding disbursal of salary. He has also put forward a claim for appointment with effect from 1-1-84 and all service benefits including payment of salary and allowances from that date. There is a further prayer for a writ of mandamus directing the Government as well "as the District Educational Officer to take appropriate action against the Manager for not implementing the order issued by the Government in his favour.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.