Back
2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 9940
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J
SYLAJA T S – Appellant
Versus
SMT ANJU K K Advocate -SRI O D SIVADAS – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 17121/2015
The court reinforces that mutual agreements in employment disputes must be endorsed by appropriate authorities for effectivity and compliance with procedural norms.
Headnote:
Appointment - Educational Employment - Government Order List - The court upheld the resolution between the petitioner and the school's manager for appointment as HSST (Maths), emphasizing procedural compliance regarding appointment timelines and monetary benefits.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an H.S.A (Maths) since 1999, sought appointment as HSST (Maths) for a vacancy effective 2013 under the by-transfer quota, contested by the school's manager. A subsequent agreement was reached for the appointment effective 2014 with benefits from 2016.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the settlement between the petitioner and the school manager, confirming the appointment and directing the necessary approval and disbursement of benefits within specified timeframes.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to be appointed as HSST (Maths) under the by-transfer quota and whether the appointment made by the school manager was valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The validity of appointments must adhere to both procedural requirements and mutual agreements established between parties involved.
Final Decision: The writ petition was closed with approval of the settlement regarding the petitioner's appointment.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is working as an H.S.A (Maths) with effect from 09.08.1999, had claimed an appointment to the post of HSST (Maths), in a vacancy that arose in the school with effect from 12.09.2013. The appointment was sought under the by- transfer quota. In the writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P12 order of the Government, which upheld the stand of the manager of the school that the petitioner could not be appointed to the vacancy of HSST(Maths), which arose with effect from 12.09.2013 in the school. When the matter was taken up for orders today, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an agreement has since been reached between the manager of the school and the petitioner, and the manager has consented to appointing the petitioner as HSST (Maths) in the school with effect from 01.09.2014 and this has been accepted by the petitioner. The appointment order makes the appointment notionally from 01.09.2014 and with monetary benefits in the scale of pay of 14,500-85,000/- with effect from 04.08.2016. In the light of the said appointment order passed by the manager of the school, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that his grievance in the writ petition stands redressed. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed by recording the settlement between the petitioner and the manager of the school, whereby the petitioner has been appointed as HSST(Maths) in the manner indicated above, and directing the 3rd respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as HSST (Maths) with effect from 01.09.2014 notionally and on scale of pay basis from 04.08.2016 in the school in question. The 3rd respondent shall pass orders of approval as directed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, and disburse to the petitioner the monetary benefits that flow from the said approval within a further period of three months.
