Surendran.P.M vs State Of Kerala Rep.By Secretary on 4 March, 2009

0
90
Kerala High Court
Surendran.P.M vs State Of Kerala Rep.By Secretary on 4 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 30841 of 2008(V)


1. SURENDRAN.P.M, HSA(SS),GHSS,VADAKARA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SECRETARY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,

3. K.P.NANU, HSA(SS), GHSS, PAYYOLI.

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :04/03/2009

 O R D E R
                            P.N.Ravindran, J.
                         ==================
                       W.P.(C) No.30841 of 2008
                      =====================

                 Dated this the 4th day of March, 2009.

                               JUDGMENT

Heard Sri. R.K.Muralidharan, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and Smt. T.B.Remani, the learned Government Pleader

appearing for respondents 1 and 2. Though notice has been served on

the third respondent, there was no representation for the third

respondent when the case was called on for hearing today.

2. The petitioner is an aided school teacher presently on

protection. He was appointed as Upper Primary School Assistant in

Rehmania High School, Ayyancheri, Vadakara in the year 1983. He was

promoted as H.S.A. (Social Science) on 29.7.1993. While the petitioner

was thus continuing in service during the academic year 2003-2004 there

was fall in the student strength which necessitated his retrenchment

from service. Thereupon, as a teacher entitled to protection under the

Government orders governing the field, he was deployed to Balussery

Boys G.H.S.S. Later during the academic year 2007-2008, he was

transferred and posted in four schools namely, Iringallur H.S.,

Government Ganapath V.H.S.S., Feroke, Ganapath Boys High School,

Chalappuram and Cheruvannur G.H.S.S.

3. While matters stood thus, a vacancy of H.S.A. (Social Science)

WP(C) 30841/08 -: 2 :-

arose in G.H.S.S., Vadakara when the incumbent Sri. T.Sreedharan was

deputed as Block Project Officer, Thodannur. That vacancy was filled up

by posting Sri. O.P. Mohanan, a protected teacher. Sri. O.P. Mohanan,

was repatriated to his parent school in the year 2008. Thereupon, by

Ext.P1 order dated 16.6.2008, the petitioner was transferred from

Cheruvannur and posted in G.H.S.S., Vadakara in the vacancy that arose

on the deputation of Sri. T. Sreedharan as Block Project Officer,

Thodannur. Nearly four months thereafter, by Ext.P2 order passed on

12.10.2008, the Deputy Director of Education posted the third

respondent, a Government School Teacher as H.S.A. in the vacancy that

arose on deputation of Sri. T.Sreedharan as Block Project Officer. The

Deputy Director of Education also directed that if protected teachers are

continuing in the post, such teachers shall be relieved. In this Writ

Petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P2 and seeks a direction to

respondents 1 and 2 not to transfer him from G.H.S.S., Vadakara to

accommodate the third respondent. The petitioner relies on the

stipulations in paragraph 2 (i) of Ext.P3 Government order to contend

that the vacancy of H.S.A., which arose as a result of the deputation of a

Government School Teacher as Block Project Officer can be filled up only

by appointing a protected teacher.

4. The learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1

and 2 contends that the petitioner cannot claim continuance in the

G.H.S.S.,Vadakara and cannot object to the posting of the third

WP(C) 30841/08 -: 3 :-

respondent in that school. Relying on Ext.P3, the learned Government

Pleader submits that the deployment on protection is only a concession

extended to the petitioner and that he has no right to continue in a

particular school.

5. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the

learned counsel appearing on either side. The official respondents do

not have a case that Ext.P3 Government order has been modified or

withdrawn. Paragraph 2(i) of Ext.P3 reads as follows:

“2. The Guidelines issued as per the G.O. read as 1st

paper above could not be implemented in toto for various

reasons. Therefore Govt. after having reconsidered the

matter in detail in consultation with DPI, are pleased to

modify the G.O. read as 1st paper above, adding the

following guidelines thereto.

(i) 50% of the vacancies of 1030 BRC trainers required

in the 8 non-DPEP Districts for the implementation of SSA

(Sarva Siksha Abhiyan) Programme shall be filled up by

selection process from among qualified and competent

protected teachers. The remaining 50% vacancies shall be

filled up by Government School teachers, and protected

teachers in the respective districts shall be deployed in the

resultant vacancies. The vacancies which arise as a result of

the posting of 103 Block Project Officers from among

Government school teachers shall also be filled up by

protected teachers. If the number of protected teachers is

not sufficient to fill up the resultant vacancies in a

particular District, such teachers of neighbouring districts

shall be considered for deployment.” (emphasis supplied)

WP(C) 30841/08 -: 4 :-

6. It is evident from paragraph 2(i) of Ext.P3 quoted above that

vacancies which arise as a result of the posting of a Government School

Teacher as Block Project Officer shall be filled up by protected teacher.

In fact, the Government order referred to above stipulates that if the

number of protected teacher in a particular district is not sufficient to fill

up such vacancies, protected teachers in the neighbouring districts shall

be considered for deployment against the remaining vacancies.

Therefore, on a plain reading of paragraph 2(i) of Ext.P3, it is evident that

vacancies which have arisen on account of posting of Government School

Teachers as Block Project Officers can be filled up only by posting

protected teachers. It is not in dispute that the vacancy of H.S.A. (Social

Science) arose in G.H.S.S., Vadakara when Sri. T.Sreedharan, H.S.A. (Social

Science) of that school was deputed as Block Project Officer, Thodannur.

The vacancy was initially filled up by deploying Sri. O.P. Mohanan, a

protected teacher. Later, Sri. O.P.Mohanan was repatriated to his parent

school and therefore a vacancy of H.S.A. again arose in the G.H.S.S.,

Vadakara, which was filled up by appointing the petitioner in terms of the

stipulation in Ext.P3 by Ext.P1 order dated 16.6.2008. By Ext.P2 the third

respondent has been posted in the petitioner’s place, with the result, the

petitioner will be relieved without a posting.

7. In my considered opinion, as Ext.P3 is still governing the field,

the transfer and posting of the third respondent as H.S.A. (Social Science)

in the G.H.S.S., Vadakara in the vacancy that arose on the deputation of

WP(C) 30841/08 -: 5 :-

Sri. T.Sreedharan as Block Project Officer cannot be sustained. Ext.P3

Government order is binding on the Deputy Director of Education,

Kozhikode. Paragraph 2(i) of Ext.P3 categorically states that vacancies of

Government School Teachers arising as a result of their posting as Block

Project Officers shall be filled up by protected teachers. Therefore,

Ext.P2 in so far as it transfers the third respondent and posts him as

H.S.A. (Social Science) in G.H.S.S., Vadakara cannot be sustained.

In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed, Ext.P2 in so far as it

relates to the petitioner and the third respondent is quashed and the

respondents are directed to retain the petitioner as protected teacher in

G.H.S.S.,Vadakara so long as Sri. T.Sreedharan continues on deputation

as Block Project Officer.

P.N.Ravindran,
Judge.

ess 16/3

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *