SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Ker) 237

Judges : K.K.USHA
Jaimy - Appellant
Versus
Dy.Director - Respondent
Case No : O.P.No. 11982 of 90, 9200 & 9545 of 91
Decided On : 07/05/1993
Advocates Appeared :
M.V. Rose & P.J. Mathew For Petitioner in O.P. 11982/90 Benny Gervacis, Govind Bharathan & Govt.Pleader (K.C. Joseph) For Respondents

The central legal point established is the importance of adhering to Rule 51-A in teacher appointments and giving preference to qualified teachers with valid claims under the rule.

Headnote:

Inter-Management Transfer - Teacher Appointment - Rule 51-A - Ch. XIV-A - [Inter-Management Transfer, Teacher Appointment, Rule 51-A, Ch. XIV-A]

Fact of the Case:

The case involves teachers claiming appointment in a school, with one teacher being appointed in a permanent vacancy and another seeking appointment through inter-management transfer. The dispute arises from the interpretation of Rule 51-A and the validity of the appointments made.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the teacher appointed through inter-management transfer was not entitled to the appointment as another teacher had a preferential claim under Rule 51-A. The court upheld the appointment of the teacher with the preferential claim and dismissed the other petitions.

Issues: The issues involved the interpretation of Rule 51-A, the validity of inter-management transfer, and the entitlement of teachers to specific appointments based on the rule.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the teacher with a preferential claim under Rule 51-A was entitled to the appointment, and the inter-management transfer was invalid. The court also emphasized the importance of complying with the rules and giving preference to qualified teachers with valid claims.

Final Decision: The court allowed one petition and held the petitioner entitled to the appointment, while dismissing the other petitions.

Judgment :-

Since the issues involved in these original petitions are the same, they were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. Documents are referred as marked in O.P. 9545/91. Petitioners in O.P. Nos. 11982/90 and 9545/91 are teachers claiming appointment in the St. Thomas High School, Kanakkadavu, Kannur District and the Manager of the above school has filed O.P. 9200/91.

2. The short facts are as follows: Sri. UJ. Paius the petitioner in O.P. 9545/91 was originally appointed as a High School Assistant (Physical science) in St. Thomas High School in a leave vacancy during the period from 16-7-1987 to 28 -10-1987. His appointment was duly approved and he was relieved from the school on the termination of the vacancy. Later, on 1-6-1988, he obtained appointment as an Upper Primary School Assistant in a permanent vacancy in St. Mary's U.P. School under another educational agency. When temporary vacancies arose in St. Thomas High School in the post of H.S.A. (Physical science) during the period from 3-6-1988 to 22-8-1988 and from 5-9-1988 to 2-12-1988, petitioner in O.P. 11982/90, Smt.C. Jaimy was appointed by the Manager. These appointments were approved by the authorities. Later a permanent vacancy arose on 1-9-1989 in the post of H.S.A.- (Physical science) during the academic year 1989-90 on account of sanctioning of an additional division by the Director of Public Instruction. The above vacancy was sought to be filled up by appointing Sri. U. J. Paious resorting to inter-management transfer and Smt. Jaimy was posted in short term vacancies from 18-9-1989 to 22-12-1989 and from 2-1-1990 to 6-3-1990. Inter-management transfer was granted to Sri. U.J. Paious on a representation submitted by him on 21-12-1989. The above request was granted as is seen from the files on the basis of a declaration given by the Manager of St. Thomas High School that there was no teacher having a claim for appointment as H.S.A. (Physical science) in the permanent post and also on the basis of as report from the Asst. Educational Officer, Irikkur. The inter-management transfer was approved under order dated 20-1-1990, copy of which is produced as Ext. P1. Later, it came to the notice of the Dist. Educational Officer that grant of an inter-management transfer to Sri. Paious was wrongly given since Smt. Jaimy had a claim under Rule 51-A for appointment to the regular vacancy which arose on 1-9-1989 and the declaration given by the Manager was false. Therefore, Ext. P2 notice dt. 23-3-1990 was issued to the Manager, St. Thomas High School directing him to show cause why grant of inter-management transfer should not be cancelled.

3. Since, no further action was taken on the basis of the above show cause notice and Smt. Jaimy was not offered an appointment in the permanent vacancy in spite of a representation made by her for the same, she filed O.P. 5602/90 before this court, which was disposed of by judgment dt. 21-6-1990 directing the Dist. Educational officer, Kannur to pass final orders in the proceedings initiated under the notice dt. 23-3-1990. Ultimately, the D.E.O. passed Ext. P7 proceedings dt. 18-9-1990 holding that the inter- management transfer granted to Sri. Paious was against the Rules. He found that no inter-management transfer could have been given ignoring the claim of Smt. Jaimy under Rule 51-A of Ch. XIV-A. It was further held that Sri. Paious cannot put forward any claim under Rule 51-A since he had already obtained an appointment in a permanent vacancy in a school under a different educational agency. The above order was not taken in appeal by Sri. Paious. But an appeal was filed by the manager before the Dy. Director of Education. The Dy. Director confirmed the view taken by the D.E.O. Ext. P10 is a copy of the proceedings dt. 20-2-1991 by the Dy. Director.

4. Even though Sri. Paious had not challenged the order passed by the D.E.O. by way of an appeal, he filed a revision before the Director of Public Instruct









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top