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

2008 Supreme(Ker) 492

Judgename : ANTONY DOMINIC
B.Shamna - Appellant
Versus
Hemambika Sanskrit High School - Respondents
Case No : W.P.C.Nos.6135 of 2008 & 5770 of 2008
Decided On : 09/18/2008

Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:N.N. Sugunapalan (Sr. Advocate) & S. Sujin, Advocate. For the Respondents:V. Chitambaresh (Sr. Advocate), T.C. Suresh Menon, Jibu P. Thomas, P.S. Appu & T.B. Remani (Government Pleader).

Headnote:

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act,1951 (T.C.), Section. 18 -Kerala Education Rules 1959 Chapter.XIV (A) Rule . 8 -Petitioner in W.P.C. No 6135 of 2008 was appointed as U.P.S.A in the Kallekulangara Hemambika Sanskrit High School as per Ext. P1 order issued by the Manager of the school. In so far as W.P.C. No 5770 of 2008 is concerned, the petitioner therein was also appointed as H.S.A (English) as per Ext. P1 order of appointment -Held,District Educational Officer will take up the proposal for approval of the appointment of the petitioners submitted by the Manager with notice to all concerned and decide the matter in the light of the observations herein above -Petitions are disposed.

Judgment :

The issue raised in these writ petitions being identical, these writ petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The petitioner in W.P.C. No 6135 of 2008 was appointed as U.P.S.A in the Kallekulangara Hemambika Sanskrit High School as per Ext. P1 order issued by the Manager of the school. In so far as W.P.C. No 5770 of 2008 is concerned, the petitioner therein was also appointed as H.S.A (English) as per Ext. P1 order of appointment, which was also issued by the Manager. The school is coming under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Administration) Department and Ext.P2 proceeding was issued by the Commissioner, H.R & C.E Department, Kozhikode on 25.01.2008 stating that in view of the complaints that were received, he was prima facie satisfied that the regularity and correctness of the matter needs to be enquired into and that the appointment of the petitioners shall be subject to the result of the enquiry proceedings. He called upon the Executive Officer, who is the Manager of the school, to produce the entire records of the selection process and posted the matter for further enquiry. Accordingly, notice was issued to the petitioner, Executive Officer, being the Manager and others and ultimately in Ext. P3 order in W.P.C. No 6135 of 2008 (Ext. P4 in W.P.C. No 5770 of 2008), the Commissioner, H.R & C.E has entered the following finding:

"Above facts leads to the following conclusion:

1. Selection process was biased and there was undue haste in issuing order and joining duty by the selectees.

2. Opportunity was denied to eligible candidates to participate in the interview which is an omission

as stated by the Chairman of the interview board.

3. There is no record showing the criteria adopted for awarding marks vitiating the criteria selection.

4. Subject expert has not awarded any marks in the interview.

5. Theselection has not been made in a transparent manner.

6. The Devaswom has sent the appointment order on 12.01.2008 under certificate of posting, which the selectees stated to have received on the same day by ordinary post even though they are residing 20 kms away.

7. The selection of teachers has been decided arbitrarily by the selection committee basing on consideration other than merit.

In the circumstances the whole selection process for appointment for the post of HSA and UPSA in Hemambika Sanskrit High School through the interview is hereby annulled with direction to conduct a fresh interview including all eligible candidates as per rules in public appointment and transparently. The criteria adopted shall be discernible from records. The Executive Officer is also directed to cancel the appointment order issued by him with immediate effect."

It is challenging Ext. P3 that these writ petitions have been filed.

3. The main contention that is raised before me is that the Commissioner who issued Ext P3 has acted without jurisdiction and interfered with the appointment made by the Manager of the school, exercising powers under the provisions of the Kerala Education Rules. It is contended that though the Executive Officer of the H.R & C.E Department has been appointed as the Manager, once such appointment is made, his powers are regulated by the provisions of the Kerala Education Act and the Rules framed thereunder. According to the petitioners, if at all there is any cause for any proceeding or any action to be taken, the remedy available can only be under the Kerala Education Act and the Rules and Section 18 of the H.R & C.E Act on the strength of which Ext P3 has been issued is totally inapplicable. It is also stated that pursuant to the orders of appointment referred to above, Manager had submitted proposal to the Controlling Officer being the District Educational Officer, Palakkad for approval and because of the proceedings issued by the Commissioner, the matter is still kept pending.

4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader would invite my attention to Ext. R3(a), a scheme framed














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