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

2025 Supreme(Ker) 1250

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 
N.NAGARESH, J.
Shyma A M W/o Ajith N V - Petitioner 
Vs.
State Of Kerala - Respondent 
WP(C) No. 44577 Of 2024 
Decided On : 13-05-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: SRI. SAJITH KUMAR V., SRI. VIVEK A.V.
For the Respondent: SRI. K.SUJAI SATHIAN, SRI. R.K.MURALEEDHARAN, SMT. PREETHI. P.V.(K/1819/1999), SMT. MARY LIYA SABU(K/001533/2018), SMT. AISWARYA S. ASHOKAN(K/678/2021), SRI. NEERAJ KRISHNA KUMAR(K/1635/2024), SMT. ANIMA M., GOVERNMENT PLEADER

Eligibility for promotion requires possession of requisite qualifications at the time of vacancy; daily wage employees cannot claim promotion without regularization.

Headnote:

(A) Kerala Education Rules - Rule 6(2)(iii) - Appointment of HSST (Maths) - Petitioner, qualified for HSST, challenged appointment of daily wage employee - Court found petitioner lacked necessary qualifications as of vacancy date - Appointment of 7th respondent upheld due to lack of approval for her prior appointment - Writ petition dismissed. (Paras 12, 16)

(B) Eligibility for Promotion - Regularization of service is essential for promotion consideration - Daily wage employee not eligible for promotion without regularization. (Paras 8, 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a qualified HST (Maths), contested the appointment of a daily wage employee as HSST (Maths) despite her own qualifications being in question due to timing of acquiring necessary certifications.

Findings of Court:
The court determined that the petitioner was not qualified for the HSST position at the time of the vacancy and upheld the appointment of the 7th respondent.

Issues: The main issues included the eligibility of the petitioner for the HSST position and the validity of the 7th respondent's appointment.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner did not possess the required qualifications at the time of the vacancy, thus her claim for appointment was invalid.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

N.NAGARESH, J.

The petitioner is working as HST (Maths) in the 5th respondent-School. She is aggrieved by the appointment of a daily wage employee against the vacancy of HSST (Maths).

2. The petitioner states that she joined service in UP Section on 06.06.2019. She was subsequently promoted as HST (Maths) on 01.06.2020. The petitioner possesses M.Sc. Degree in Maths, KTET Category II and III and SET. She is therefore fully eligible to be appointed as HSST (Maths).

3. A vacancy of HSST (Maths) arose on 31.05.2023. The Manager of the School, as per Ext.P2 order dated 01.06.2023, appointed the 7th respondent as HSST, who was then working on daily wage basis as HST, though she was not eligible to hold the post.

4. The 7th respondent had worked on daily wage basis from 02.06.2022 to 31.03.2023. She was not working as on 01.06.2023. Her temporary service on daily wage basis is not liable to be considered for appointment to the post of HSST. The petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation dated 01.03.2024 to the 3rd respondent- Regional Deputy Director. Though Ext.P3 representation has not been considered, the Regional Deputy Director has rejected approval to the appointment of the 7th respondent as per Ext.P4 order dated 29.05.2024.

5. In spite of Ext.P4, the petitioner was not granted appointment as HSST. The petitioner therefore submitted Ext.P5 representation dated 06.06.2024 to the 2nd respondent-DGE. In the meanwhile, Ext.P6 order was issued on 22.01.2024 approving the daily wage appointment of the 7th respondent. Ext.P6 made it clear that the 7th respondent will not be eligible for benefits available to the regular employees including increments till the appointment is regularised.

6. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 representation dated 01.06.2024 to the 5th respondent-Manager of the School. The request of the petitioner was rejected as per Ext.P9 order dated 29.05.2024 of the Regional Deputy Director. Though the petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.23789/2024 challenging Ext.P9, the writ petition was disposed of by this Court as per Ext.P10 judgment dated 03.07.2024 directing the 2nd respondent to pass orders on the representation of the petitioner. On 06.12.2024, the petitioner’s appeal was rejected by the 2nd respondent as per Ext.P1 order.

7. The counsel for the petitioner argued that she became eligible and qualified for appointment to the post of HSST (Maths) with effect from February, 2024. The appointment of the 7th respondent to the post of HSST (Maths) was rejected as per Ext.P4 order dated 29.05.2024. As on the date of Ext.P4 order, the petitioner was the sole person fulfilling the eligibility and qualifications for appointment to the post. However, respondents 2 to 5 have arbitrarily denied promotion to the petitioner.

8. The counsel for the petitioner further argued that regularisation of service / declaration of probation is an essential tenet of service for consideration for promotion. The 7th respondent therefore was not eligible for promotion as HSST. Exts.P1, P12 and P15 are therefore liable to be quashed.

9. The 5th respondent-School submitted that the vacancy of HSST arose on 01.06.2023. The 5th respondent issued notice on 05.06.2023 informing the teaching staff who are qualified to hold the post of HSST (Maths). The petitioner did not make any claim. The 7th respondent pointed out that her appointment as HST (Mathematics) was approved on a regular pay scale as per Ext.R7(d) order dated 11.08.2024. The 7th respondent was appointed as HSST (Maths) as per Ext.R7(c) order dated 01.06.2023.

10. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 4, learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent and the learned counsel for the 7th respondent.

11. The petitioner was appointed as HST (Maths) on 01.06.2020. The petitioner possesses M.Sc. Degree in Maths, KTET Category II and III and SET. The 7th respondent was appointed as HST (Maths) on 02.06.2022

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