IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 32690 of 2010(I)
1. RAJESHKUMAR.T,S/O.K.R.THRILOCHANAN NAIR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE MANAGER,NARAKKAV HIGH SCHOOL,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY
3. THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :28/10/2010
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.32690 OF 2010
------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of October, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is working as HSA in Narokkav
High School, Edakkara, Malappuram District under
the management of the first respondent. It is
stated that the petitioner has secured B.Sc. and
B.Ed. qualifications from the University of
Calicut. He passed M.Sc. in Mathematics from
Vinayaka Mission University in Tamil Nadu in the
year 2009 under Distance Education Programme
conducted by that University. It is stated that in
all States except Kerala, the Degree conferred by
Vinayaka Mission University is recognized.
However, the petitioner got information that the
University of Calicut did not recognize the Degrees
conferred by Vinayaka Mission University on
Distance Education Programme, as equivalent to the
Degree of the University of Calicut.
W.P.(C).No.32690 OF 2010 2
2. The petitioner apprehends that when
vacancies of Higher Secondary School Teachers arise
on sanctioning the same, he may not be considered
for appointment on the ground that the Post-
Graduate Degree secured by him was not on the basis
of a regular course of study. The petitioner relies
on Ext.P1 circular issued by the Kerala Public
Service Commission in the year 2005 stating that
for appointment to all posts including posts of
teachers, qualification acquired on Distance
Education could be recognized.
3. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the Calicut University submitted that
the Degree conferred by Vinayaka Mission University
on the basis of Distance Education Programme is not
recognized by Calicut University.
4. After having heard the learned counsel for
the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the University, I am of the view that
the Writ Petition is anticipatory in nature. At
W.P.(C).No.32690 OF 2010 3
present, there is no occasion for considering the
question whether the petitioner is qualified to be
appointed as Higher Secondary School Teacher.
Secondly, if the petitioner is aggrieved by non
consideration for appointment by the Manager, he
has an effective alternative remedy to approach the
educational authorities or the Government as the
case may be, as per the provisions of Chapter XXXII
of the Kerala Education Rules.
In the facts and circumstances mentioned above,
I do not think it is necessary to entertain the
Writ Petition at this stage. Leaving open the
right of the petitioner to approach the appropriate
authorities, and also reserving the right of the
petitioner to approach this court for any relief
against the University at the appropriate time, the
Writ Petition is closed.
K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
cms