Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 4590
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J
JISHA ANTONY. – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) 37698/2022
V.A.MUHAMMED, V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, SMT. NISHA BOSE, SR.GP
Teachers' appointments must receive formal approval under Kerala Education Rules for salary entitlements, and prior approvals hold legal weight.
Headnote:
Education - Teacher Appointments - Kerala Education Act - Chapter XIV A - The court examined the amendment provisions under the Kerala Education Rules relating to teacher appointments and established that formal approval from educational authorities is necessary for validation and salary disbursement.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, recently appointed teachers, sought approval for their appointments and salary disbursal based on the SAMANWAYA portal approvals, claiming that despite such approvals, no formal orders were issued by the authorities.
Finding of the Court:
The court concluded that since the petitioners' appointments were recorded as approved in the SAMANWAYA portal before certain interim orders, they were entitled to formal approval and salary retroactive to their appointment dates.
Issues: Whether the appointments of the petitioners are legally valid and if they are entitled to salary and allowances despite the lack of formal orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the amendments to the Kerala Education Rules require formal approval for teacher appointments, and since the petitioners were excluded from certain prohibitions based on prior judgments, they were entitled to the relief sought.
Final Decision: The writ petition is allowed, declaring appointments valid and directing formal approval and salary disbursal within two months.
JUDGMENT
The 1st petitioner was appointed as Lower Primary School Teacher (LPST) in the St. Thomas U.P.School, Champakkulam, on 15.07.2021, and the 2nd petitioner was appointed on 02.08.2021 in the Amalolbhava L.P.School, Pulinkunnu as per Exts.P1 and P3 orders respectively. The above schools are run by the 6th respondent Corporate Management in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Education Act and the Rules framed thereunder.
2. The petitioners rely upon Exhibit P2, downloaded copy of the print-out from the SAMANWAYA portal, and it is contended that the information stated therein would unequivocally show that the appointment of the petitioners has been approved. They assert that despite approving their appointment, the respondents have not issued formal orders of approval, and the petitioners have not been allotted Permanent Employee Numbers (PEN) so that they could claim salary based on the approval granted to them. It is contended that the Kerala Education Rules stand amended and sub-rule 2 of Rule 8 of Chapter XIVA makes it clear that the appointment order, signed by the Manager along with other records, is required to be submitted to the educational officer for approval through SAMANWAYA, and the officer concerned can approve the appointment only through SAMANWAYA. It is further stated that various clauses of the amendment, as per which approval was ordered to be granted through SAMANWAYA, were challenged before this Court, and by judgment dated 13.07.2022 in W.P.(C) No.17542/2022 had repelled the challenge and had upheld the amendment. It is on these assertions that this writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that Exts.P1 and P3 orders of appointment and approval made as per Exts.P2 and P4 are legally valid and for a declaration that the petitioners are entitled to get salary, and other allowances with effect from 15.07.2021 and 02.08.2021 respectively as the appointment stands approved.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 5th respondent. In para 6 of the counter, it has been stated as follows:
6. It is submitted that the first and second petitioners were appointed with effect from 15.07.2021 and 02.08.2021, respectively. Eventhough the approval of appointment of petitioners was noted in Samanwaya Portal on 22.09.2021 as final proceedings approving the appointment of the petitioner not issued. Only the appointment proposals were scrutinized and approval was noted in Samanwaya Portal. Subsequent orders were not issued, It is submitted that final orders of approval is not issued as per Rule 8 of Chapter XIV A of KER. If final approval order is issued alone a teacher can be considered to have got approval.
4. Sri. Sajjad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that identical issues had come up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court and the Division Bench by judgment dated 23.12.2022 in W.A.No. 1825/2022 [Neutral Citation No. 2022/KER/74852], taking note of the fact that the appointments had been approved prior to the issuance of the interim order dated 23.09.2021 in W.P.(C) No.19808/2021, had held that the case of the petitioners therein would also come within the category of teachers who have been excluded by the said judgment. It was further held that in the light of the interim order dated 23.12.2022 in W.A. No.1546/2022 and connected cases, the educational officer concerned can issue formal order(s) of approval subject to compliance of the directions in W.A.No.1546/2022.
5. I have heard the learned Government Pleader.
6. As the respondents have come on record by contending that the approval of the petitioners have been granted prior to the issuance of the interim order dated 23.09.2021, the petitioners herein would also come within the category that has been excluded by the judgment rendered by this Court.
7. In that view of the matter, this writ petition will stand allowed. It is declared that Exts.P1 and P3 orders of appointment are legal and valid, and they a
