Back
P. B. SURESH KUMAR, C. S. SUDHA
Sreejith T. , Upper Primary School Assistant – Appellant
Versus
Manager, A. M. Upper Primary School – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.
1. The issues involved in these writ petitions are closely interlinked and they are, therefore, disposed of by this common judgment. Parties and documents are referred to in this judgment for convenience, as they appear in W.P.(C) No.26553 of 2014.
2. The petitioner was appointed in terms of Ext.P1 order as Lower Primary School Assistant (LPSA) in A.M. Upper Primary School, Punnathala (the School) on 01.06.2009 in the leave vacancy of one Sabira Pottachola for the period upto 10.10.2010. The appointment in terms of Ext.P1 was not approved initially by the Educational Officer. The leave granted to Sabira Pottachola was later extended up to 10.10.2015. When the leave of the teacher referred to above was extended up to 10.10.2015, the appointment of the petitioner was also extended up to 10.10.2015 as per Ext.P2 order. The appointment of the petitioner in terms of Ext.P2 order was also not initially approved by the Educational Officer. The Manager though took up the matter relating to the approval of the appointments in terms of Exts.P1 and P2 in appeal before the District Educational Officer, the same was rejected. The decision of the District Educati
Services of leave substitutes will be regularized against the first arising permanent/regular vacancy in the respective schools in the order of seniority
Important points:The appellant had rendered service in the leave vacancy for the period between 27.10.1986 and 30.9.1991 which was the period covered by his appointment letter as approved by the Educ....
Point of Law : Rule 53 of Chapter XIV(A) KER reads as A teacher shall not himself terminate his service before the expiry of the term of his appointment without the permission of the Educational Offi....
The manager's discretion in teacher appointments is subject to established preference rights under the Kerala Education Rules.
A teacher who quits service loses entitlement to benefits under Rule 51A of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959.
The requirement for contemporaneous documentation in employment appointment cases is essential; lack of genuine records can invalidate administrative decisions.
Right to preferential appointment envisaged therein accrues only to a teacher who has been “relieved” in any of the circumstances mentioned in the Rule.
The provisions of the Kerala Education Rules govern appointments, and while familial claims exist, they do not override statutory norms for educational appointments.
The non-approval of an appointed teacher's position cannot be justified due to administrative oversights if the rules allow for her approval.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
