Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J
INDU R – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. approval for teacher's position challenged. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments on non-approval based on manager's failure. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court directs reconsideration of approval due to errors. (Para 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT Dated this the 5th day of March, 2026 The petitioner is before this Court challenging Exts.P2, P3, P9 and P13 orders. The petitioner, being duly qualified, was appointed to the post of UPST in the 6th respondent’s Aided Management School for the period from 01.10.2021 to 31.05.2024 against the vacancy that arose due to the Leave Without Allowance (LWA) availed by Smt.Deepa B. Pillai, UPSA, for the period from 02.06.2020 to 31.05.2024. The petitioner has been working in the School pursuant to Ext.P1 Appointment Order issued by the
6th respondent.
2. Approval to Ext.P1 appointment was rejected by the respondents as per Exts.P2, P3 and P9 orders on the ground that the leave period of Smt.Deepa B. Pillai from 02.06.2020 to 31.05.2023 had not been sanctioned. It was further stated that the Manager had not appointed a protected Teacher from the Teachers’ Bank in the vacancy held by the petitioner as mandated under Chapter XXI, Rule 7 of the Keral
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
