Back
2012 Supreme(Online)(KER) 37116
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J
D JAYASHREE UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL – Appellant
Versus
THE MANAGER, ERAMALLOOR UNION HIGHSCHOOL – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 28546/2011
Promotion to educational positions must align with established qualifications and subject requirements defined by educational regulations.
Headnote:
Promotion - High School Assistant - KER Rule 43 - The court held that promotion to High School Assistant must adhere to prescribed subject requirements, rejecting arguments for accommodation against unrelated posts.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved two writ petitions regarding the promotion and appointment of High School Assistants following a vacancy created by prior promotions, leading to disputes over rights and qualifications.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the government order supporting the promotion of one petitioner was valid and that the accommodation of the second petitioner to a different subject was not permissible under the relevant rules.
Issues: The primary issue was the validity of the government order promoting one petitioner over another claimant and whether the latter could be accommodated against an unrelated post.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that promotion requires adherence to the specific qualifications and subject requirements as stipulated in relevant educational rules.
Final Decision: W.P.(C)No.28546/11 is dismissed and W.P.(C)No.26548/11 is allowed.
JUDGMENT
The writ petitioners in W.P.(C)No.26548/11 seeks for implementation of Exhibit P3 order passed by the Government in a revision petition filed by the 1st petitioner. The said order is under challenge by the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.28546/2011, who is working as High School Assistant(Social Studies) in the school.
2. The 1st petitioner in W.P.(C)No.26548/2011 was working as Upper Primary School Assistant in the school. She was promoted as HSA (Mathematics) with effect from 2.6.2008. A vacancy of High School Assistant(Mathematics) arose when one Smt.R.Usha Devi, High School Assistant (Mathematics) was promoted as Headmistress from 1.4.2008. In the resultant vacancy of UPSA, the second petitioner who was already working in the school, was shifted.
3. The approval of the proposals were rejected by the departmental officers holding the view that the additional 4th respondent who has been working as High School Assistant (Social Studies) became excess and she has to be accommodated against the post of High School Assistant (Mathematics). The said stand of the Department was not upheld by the Government and the Government by Exhibit P3 order directed approval of appointment of the 1st petitioner as High School Assistant (Mathematics) from 2.6.2008.
4. As far as W.P.(C)No.28546/11 is concerned, the case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as High School Assistant (Social Studies) on 8.6.1993. As per GO(MS) No.11/02/G.Edn. dated 7.1.2002, a separate category of High School Assistant (English) was created in the aided and Government schools by reallocating the periods of English allocated to core subjects in a phased manner without causing retrenchment of existing High School Assistants(Core Subjects). Exhibit P1 is the copy of the said order. In the staff fixation order for the year 2008, 12 divisions were sanctioned and 12 posts of teachers were allowed to core subjects and it is the case of the petitioner that she should have been accommodated against the vacancy that arose due to the promotion of Smt.R.Usha Devi as Headmistress. Thus the contention is that she being a senior hand and became excess because of want of a post of High School Assistant (Social Studies), the Manager should have accommodated her without promoting the 1st petitioner in W.P.
(C)No.26548/11.
5. The respondents have filed counter affidavits in the matter. In the counter affidavit filed by the Manager, the stand taken is that in the light of the fact that the subject requirement has to be satisfied, the Manager promoted Smt.Jayasree who is the 1st petitioner in W.P.(C)No.26548/11. The petitioner in W.P. (C)No.28546/11 Smt.Remadevi is entitled for protection as per various Government orders Exhibits R3(a) and R3(b). It is the case of the Manager that the excess High School Assistant (Social Studies) hand cannot be adjusted against the post of High School Assistant (Mathematics). The claimant under Rule 43 is therefore entitled for promotion.
6. It appears that the Manager has been challenging various orders and ultimately the Government considered various aspects and passed the impugned order in W.P.(C)No.28546/11.
7. Exhibit R3(d) is the staff fixation order for the year
2002-03 wherein two posts of HSA(English) have been sanctioned. It appears that only one post of High School Assistant (English) has been filled by the Manager. The learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.28546/11 Smt.S.Remadevi submitted that she is qualified to teach English and she has to be adjusted against the vacant post of High School Assistant (English). As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the Manager, in none of the orders Department Officers have clarified that the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.28546/11 has been accommodated in the staff fixation order. Evidently, the Government has found that the vacancy of High School Assistant (Mathematics) will have to be filled up in terms of the relevant rules by a qualified person. It cannot be said that the said view ta
