{"id":194111,"date":"2010-07-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010"},"modified":"2017-09-21T02:46:06","modified_gmt":"2017-09-20T21:16:06","slug":"marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 37178 of 2009(N)\n\n\n1. MARCIA COLLIN NORONHA,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,\n\n3. THE MANAGER,\n\n4. SMT.MARY BRINCEL HURTIS, H.S.A.,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PANAMPALLI NAGAR)\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN\n\n Dated :30\/07\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                       K.T. SANKARAN, J.\n                    ---------------------------\n                  W.P(C). No. 37178 of 2009\n                ------------------------------------\n               Dated this the 30th day of July, 2010\n\n                        J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
     The petitioner was appointed as H.S.A. (English) in CCPLM<\/p>\n
Anglo Indian High School, Perumannoor, of which the 3rd<\/p>\n
respondent is the Manger, in a leave vacancy for the period from<\/p>\n
17\/8\/2006 to 31\/7\/2010. The Educational Authorities did not<\/p>\n
approve the appointment of the petitioner in the leave vacancy<\/p>\n
pointing out various grounds. One of the grounds was that the 3rd<\/p>\n
respondent-school being a newly opened school, without<\/p>\n
appointing a protected teacher, the petitioner should not have<\/p>\n
been appointed in the leave vacancy. Another reason stated was<\/p>\n
the following: The leave vacancy arose on granting leave without<\/p>\n
allowance for a period of five years from 1\/8\/2005 to Carol<\/p>\n
Subrena Beveria and in that vacancy Beena A. was appointed as<\/p>\n
H.S.A. (English). Later, Beena A. was permanently appointed as<\/p>\n
H.S.A. (English) against a regular vacancy which arose with<\/p>\n
effect from 17\/8\/2006. The appointment of Beena in the leave<\/p>\n
vacancy was not approved and, therefore, the appointment of the<\/p>\n
W.P(C). No. 37178\/2009
\n                                  2<\/span><\/p>\n
petitioner also could not be approved. When the matter reached<\/p>\n
before the Government, Exhibit P1 order was passed on<\/p>\n
23\/12\/2008 granting approval to the appointment of the<\/p>\n
petitioner as H.S.A. (English) for the period from 17\/8\/2006 to<\/p>\n
31\/7\/2010.\n<\/p>\n
      2.     While the petitioner was continuing as H.S.A. (English)<\/p>\n
in the leave vacancy, a regular vacancy of H.S.A (English) arose<\/p>\n
in the school on 1\/6\/2008 on the promotion of Ivy Louis as<\/p>\n
Headmistress of the school. In that vacancy, the Manager<\/p>\n
appointed Smt. Mary Brincel Hurtis, the 4th respondent. However,<\/p>\n
the appointment of Smt. Mary Brincel Hurtis was not approved by<\/p>\n
the District Educational Officer and the proposal for approval was<\/p>\n
rejected by the D.E.O as per Exhibit R4(d) order dated<\/p>\n
26\/10\/2009. The Manager has filed an appeal to the Deputy<\/p>\n
Director of Education challenging the order dated 26\/10\/2009<\/p>\n
passed by the District Educational Officer and that appeal is<\/p>\n
pending.\n<\/p>\n
      3.     In this Writ Petition, the reliefs prayed for by the<\/p>\n
W.P(C). No. 37178\/2009
\n                                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
petitioner are the following:\n<\/p>\n
        (i) to issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction
\n             commanding and compelling the respondents to
\n             consider the objection preferred by the petitioner
\n             in relation to the appointment of the 4th
\n             respondent overlooking     to the post of H.S.A.
\n             (English) the claim of the petitioner and not to
\n             grant approval of appointment of the 4th
\n             respondent without considering the claim of the
\n             petitioner;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         (ii) to declare that the petitioner being a Rule 51A<\/p>\n
             claimant is entitled for appointment to the<\/p>\n
             permanent vacancy caused consequent to the<\/p>\n
             promotion of Ivy Louis as Headmistress with<\/p>\n
             effect from 1\/6\/2008 and direct the respondents<\/p>\n
             to shift the petitioner to that vacancy and grant<\/p>\n
             approval of such appointment;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         (iii) to issue such other writ, order or direction as<\/p>\n
             this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper<\/p>\n
             in the circumstances of this case.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      4.     Sri. P.C. Sasidharan, the learned counsel appearing for<\/p>\n
the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner being a claimant<\/p>\n
under Rule 51A of Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules,<\/p>\n
she should have been appointed in preference to the 4th<\/p>\n
respondent, who could be promoted only under Rule 43 of<\/p>\n
W.P(C). No. 37178\/2009
\n                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n
Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules. Rule 43 of<\/p>\n
Chapter XIV-A being subject to Rule 51A, the petitioner has got<\/p>\n
preferential right of appointment over the 4th respondent. Sri.<\/p>\n
P.C. Sasidharan also submitted that to attract Rule 51A, it is not<\/p>\n
necessary that the teacher, who claims the benefit of preferential<\/p>\n
appointment, should have been thrown out from the service on<\/p>\n
retrenchment. As the petitioner was continuing in the leave<\/p>\n
vacancy, she could be shifted to the vacancy which arose during<\/p>\n
the currency of the period of leave vacancy in which the<\/p>\n
petitioner was working. It is submitted that the Manager was not<\/p>\n
justified at all in appointing the 4th respondent ignoring the<\/p>\n
preferential claim of the petitioner. The counsel also pointed out<\/p>\n
that the Government had issued G.O.(M.S) No.275\/99\/G.Edn.<\/p>\n
dated 9\/11\/1999 making the position clear that the services of<\/p>\n
leave substitutes will be regularised against the first arising<\/p>\n
permanent\/regular vacancy in the respective schools in the order<\/p>\n
of seniority. The counsel pointed out that this Government Order<\/p>\n
was referred to by the Division Bench of this Court in Geetha<\/p>\n
W.P(C). No. 37178\/2009
\n                                  5<\/span><\/p>\n
Vs. Geo Thomas [2009(4) K.L.T. 514] and held that the Manger<\/p>\n
cannot deny promotion or re-appointment on the ground that<\/p>\n
original appointment of the claimant was not yet approved. In<\/p>\n
Geetha Vs. Geo Thomas, it was held thus:\n<\/p>\n
                    In the light of the above provisions, the
\n             Manager       could      have       made       the
\n             appointments\/retrenchments only in accordance
\n             with R.51 of Chapter XIV-A of the K.E.R. quoted
\n             above and Ext.R6(a) order mentioned above.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             The Manager could not take shelter behind the
\n             plea that when the regular vacancy arose, the
\n             appointment of the appellant in the maternity
\n             leave vacancy was not approved. The Manager
\n             knew that the appointment was in a maternity
\n             leave vacancy which arose in a post sanctioned
\n             as per the Staff Fixation Order of that year, that
\n             the appellant was qualified for appointment as
\n             U.P.S.A. also and therefore, even if there is
\n             delay, the appellant’s appointment was going to
\n             be approved. Therefore, when the regular
\n             vacancy arose, the appellant should have been
\n             accommodated in that vacancy and a fresh hand
\n             could have been appointed only in the remaining
\n             portion of the maternity leave vacancy, in which
\n             the appellant was working. As a matter of fact,
\n             as the remaining period of the said leave
\n             vacancy does not have a duration of two
\n             months, the first respondent could not have
\n             been appointed at all, as U.P.S.A, in view of R.7A
\n             (3) of Chapter XIV-A of the K.E.R., which says
\n             that, the vacancies which have duration of two
\n             months or less period shall not be filled up by<\/p>\n
W.P(C). No. 37178\/2009
\n                                   6<\/span><\/p>\n
             any appointment. The said two months period
\n             has since been amended with effect from
\n             16\/4\/2005, but, when the appointment of the
\n             first respondent was made, the unamended rule
\n             was remaining in force. The legal position that
\n             the Manager cannot deny promotion or re-\n<\/p>\n
             appointment    for   the  reason  that   original
\n             appointment was not yet approved, is covered
\n             by the Division Bench decision of this Court in
\n             Joshi Vs. Krishna P. Rajan [2007(2) K.L.T. SN 63
\n             (C.No.85)].\n<\/p>\n
     5.      In Joshi. Vs. Krishna P. Rajan [2007(2) K.L.T. SN<\/p>\n
63(C.No.85)], another Division Bench of this Court held that the<\/p>\n
Manager cannot deny promotion or re-appointment on the mere<\/p>\n
ground that approval order of original appointment was not<\/p>\n
passed by the Educational authority.\n<\/p>\n
     6.      Sri. P. Santhosh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing<\/p>\n
for the 4th respondent and Sri. G. Sukumara Menon, the learned<\/p>\n
counsel appearing for the Manager submitted that the petitioner<\/p>\n
cannot be considered as a claimant under Rule 51A of<\/p>\n
Chapter XIV-A of K.E.R. It is submitted that the opening words of<\/p>\n
Rule 51A make the position clear that in order to claim the<\/p>\n
benefit of preferential appointment, the claimant should be a<\/p>\n
W.P(C). No. 37178\/2009
\n                                   7<\/span><\/p>\n
person who was relieved either as per Rule 49 or Rule 52 of<\/p>\n
Chapter XIV-A or on account of termination of vacancy. In the<\/p>\n
case on hand, the petitioner was continuing in service on the date<\/p>\n
of occurrence of the regular vacancy and she was not retrenched<\/p>\n
or her services were not terminated, in order to attract Rule 51A.<\/p>\n
It is also submitted that even assuming that the Manager could<\/p>\n
not appoint a total stranger in such circumstances, there was no<\/p>\n
bar in appointing a Rule 43 claimant when a regular vacancy<\/p>\n
arose, so long as there was no other preferential claimant. The<\/p>\n
petitioner’s right to make any preferential claim had not ripened<\/p>\n
into a full right at the relevant time and, therefore, there was<\/p>\n
nothing wrong on the part of the Manager in appointing the 4th<\/p>\n
respondent.\n<\/p>\n
      7.     Sri. P.C. Sasidharan replied stating that the contention<\/p>\n
put forward by Sri. P. Santhosh Kumar and Shri. Sukumara<\/p>\n
Menon is unsustainable in the light of the dictum laid down by the<\/p>\n
Division Bench of this Court in Geetha Vs. Geo Thomas [2009<\/p>\n
(4) K.L.T. 514].\n<\/p>\n
W.P(C). No. 37178\/2009
\n                                  8<\/span><\/p>\n
      8.     Since the question of approval of appointment of the<\/p>\n
4th respondent is pending consideration before the Deputy<\/p>\n
Director of Education and since the claim put forward by the<\/p>\n
petitioner was not considered by any of the Educational<\/p>\n
Authorities, I think it would be only proper if the matter is<\/p>\n
considered by the educational authority. The learned counsel<\/p>\n
appearing for all the parties submitted that it would be ideal if the<\/p>\n
matter is considered by the Director of Public Instructions. They<\/p>\n
submitted that adopting such a course would shorten the<\/p>\n
litigation. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the<\/p>\n
matter is now pending before the Deputy Director and if the<\/p>\n
Court so directs, there is no difficulty and legal impediment for<\/p>\n
the Director of Public Instructions to hear the case.<\/p>\n
      Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows:<\/p>\n
              The question whether the petitioner should have<\/p>\n
      been appointed by the Manager in the vacancy of<\/p>\n
      H.S.A.(English) which arose in the school on 1\/6\/2008<\/p>\n
      or whether the appointment of the 4th respondent in<\/p>\n
W.P(C). No. 37178\/2009
\n                                  9<\/span><\/p>\n
     that vacancy should be approved, whether the<\/p>\n
     petitioner has got preferential right under Rule 51A of<\/p>\n
     Chapter XIV-A of K.E.R in the facts and circumstances,<\/p>\n
     whether the 4th respondent would get a right to be<\/p>\n
     appointed under Rule 43 in preference to the petitioner<\/p>\n
     and all other relevant aspects of the case shall be<\/p>\n
     considered by the Director of Public Instructions,<\/p>\n
     taking into account all the relevant facts and after<\/p>\n
     affording an opportunity of being heard to the<\/p>\n
     petitioner, the Manager and the 4th respondent and<\/p>\n
     also any other affected party. The petitioner shall<\/p>\n
     produce a copy of the Writ Petition, a Copy of the<\/p>\n
     Counter affidavit and certified copy of the judgment<\/p>\n
     before the Director of Public instructions. The Director<\/p>\n
     of Public Instructions shall dispose of the matter within<\/p>\n
     a period of two months from the date of receipt of a<\/p>\n
     copy of the judgment.\n<\/p>\n
     The learned counsel appearing for the Manager submitted<\/p>\n
W.P(C). No. 37178\/2009
\n                              10<\/span><\/p>\n
that there are vacancies in the school and the petitioner most<\/p>\n
probably need not have to go out and she would be adequately<\/p>\n
accommodated, if otherwise it does not become impossible. This<\/p>\n
submission is recorded.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                    K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE<\/p>\n
scm<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 37178 of 2009(N) 1. MARCIA COLLIN NORONHA, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, … Respondent 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, 3. THE MANAGER, 4. SMT.MARY BRINCEL HURTIS, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-194111","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMarcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-20T21:16:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-20T21:16:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1762,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-20T21:16:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-20T21:16:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-20T21:16:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010"},"wordCount":1762,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010","name":"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-20T21:16:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/marcia-collin-noronha-vs-the-deputy-director-of-education-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Marcia Collin Noronha vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 30 July, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/194111","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=194111"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/194111\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=194111"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=194111"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=194111"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}