IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 13842 of 2009(A)
1. JOYCIE E.J., W/O. MOHANDAS KALARIKKAL,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE CORPORATE MANAGER,
... Respondent
2. THE STATE OF KERALA,
3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
4. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR (ACADEMIC),
5. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
6. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
7. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, EDUCATION,
8. LINDA JASMINE HENRY,
9. PETER DEVADAS P.V.,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.M.FIROZ
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :12/06/2009
O R D E R
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C). No.13842/2009-A
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 12th day of June, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The short question that arises for consideration is whether the
Government was right in directing to transfer the eighth respondent as
Headmistress of the B.E.M.L.P School, Kozhikode, while rendering its
decision on an issue regarding the grievances raised by the petitioner herein
against rejection of her claim for appointment as Headmistress.
2. The necessary facts required for the disposal of the writ petition
are the following:-
The petitioner was a Lower Primary Assistant under the first
respondent Manager and she was working in B.E.M.L.P School, Kozhikode.
In the year 2006, she was given a promotion as Headmistress which was
relinquished by her as per Ext.P1. The said relinquishment was accepted by
the Assistant Educational Officer as a permanent one, as per Ext.P2.
Therefore, the petitioner sought to withdraw the same and submitted Ext.P3
before the Manager, specifically praying that she may be considered for
promotion when the next vacancy of Headmistress arises. The matter was
again considered by the District Educational Officer, as per Ext.P4. The
W.P.(C). No.13842/2009
-:2:-
decision therein went against the petitioner herein. The petitioner thereafter
filed Ext.P5 application before the Government challenging Ext.P4 order.
3. Meanwhile, the eighth respondent was promoted as
Headmistress and was transferred to B.E.M.L.P School,
Parappanangadi. A vacancy arose in the Malabar Christian College
L.P.School, Kozhikode on 31/03/2008 and she requested for a posting there.
In the said vacancy, the petitioner was appointed at that point of time. The
ninth respondent was transferred to B.E.M.L.P School, Parappanangadi and
the eighth respondent was transferred and posted to BE.M.L.P. School,
Manjeri by the Manager. The eighth respondent filed representation before
the authorities. The dispute therein was considered by the Addl.D.P.I at the
instance of respondents 8 and 9 and pursuant to the directions issued by this
Court in W.P.(C).No.14727/2008. Going by Ext.P6, the eighth respondent
was ordered to be transferred and posted to B.E.M.L.P. School,
Parappanangadi but the claim raised by the petitioner was not accepted. In
the place of the petitioner, the ninth respondent was directed to be
appointed. The petitioner challenged the said order in revision Ext.P7
before the Government.
W.P.(C). No.13842/2009
-:3:-
4. The Government by Ext.P9 decided in favour of the writ
petitioner in regard to the claim for promotion as Headmistress. It was
ordered that her appointment of Headmistress could be approved on the
petitioner submitting a letter for withdrawing the relinquishment but at the
same time it was also ordered that the eighth respondent being a cancer
patient, she will be given a posting as Headmistress at B.E.M.L.P. School,
Kozhikode and the D.P.I was directed to issue necessary orders.
Accordingly, Ext.P10, a consequential order was passed by the Director of
Public Instructions. The eighth respondent is now directed to be transferred
from B.E.M.L.P School, Parappanangadi to B.E.M.L.P. School, Kozhikode.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the
learned Government Pleader, the learned counsel appearing for the first
respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the eighth respondent.
6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as
against Ext.P6, the eighth respondent had not filed any revision petition
before the Government and therefore, it was not proper on the part of the
Government to pass an order in favour of the eighth respondent for a
posting in her choice school. It is further pointed out that transfer and
posting is a matter which the Manager alone could do in accordance with
W.P.(C). No.13842/2009
-:4:-
Rules. Since the Government has passed an order in favour of the eighth
respondent, the petitioner is left without any remedy in the matter.
7. The learned counsel for the eighth respondent submits that, as
far the claim for promotion of the petitioner is concerned, actually she is not
affected but being a cancer patient, she sought for a posting on medical and
compassionate grounds before the D.P.I and therefore, considering her
claim the Government passed the present order. The learned counsel for the
Manager submitted that the eighth respondent is a cancer patient and she
requires consideration on that basis for a convenient posting.
8. The transfer and posting of the respective parties have to be
done by the Manager. The decision in that regard has to be taken by the
Manager, at the first instance. In that view of the matter, it was not proper
for the Government to issue a direction as now done in Ext.P9. Of course,
as revealed from the pleadings, the eighth respondent being a cancer patient,
requires sympathetic consideration at the hands of the Manager and it is
upto the Manager to pass appropriate orders in the matter. To enable the
Manager to do so, the orders Exts.P9 and P10 to the extent it directs the
posting of the eighth respondent in B.E.M.L.P School, Kozhikode is set
aside. The first respondent will pass appropriate orders after considering
W.P.(C). No.13842/2009
-:5:-
competing claims of the parties within a period of ten days from the date of
receipt of the copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
ms