2026 Supreme(Ker) 843

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.M.MANOJ, J.
Annamma Jacob – Petitioner 
Versus 
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Secretary To Government, General Education Department – Respondent 
WP(C) No. 11715 of 2018, 6969 of 2021
Decided On : 01-04-2026

Denying aided school principals the permanent exemption from departmental tests available to government principals after age 50 constitutes unconstitutional discrimination, as no intelligible differentia exists between the two sectors regarding duties and responsibilities.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14 - Right to Equality - Aided School Teachers - Parity with Government School Teachers regarding exemption from departmental tests - Denial of exemption to aided school principals after completion of age 50, while granting same to government counterparts constitutes discrimination. (Paras 12, 15, 31, 66)

(B) Kerala Education Rules - Chapter XXXII - Rule 9 - Probation and departmental test qualifications - While the rule mandates tests, its application must not result in arbitrary discrimination when compared to identical service conditions in the government sector. (Paras 9, 54, 55)

(C) Statutory Interpretation - Clarificatory or Curative Legislation - Government orders removing specific service conditions or clarifying exemptions to correct anomalies operate retrospectively as they do not create new rights but acknowledge existing legal positions. (Paras 16, 38, 61, 62)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, serving as principals in private schools, were denied declaration of probation and associated service benefits, including increments, on the ground that they had not passed mandatory departmental tests. Although they had attained the age of 50 years, the authorities denied them the permanent exemption from test qualifications that is statutorily available to principals in government-run schools. The petitioners contended that their duties, qualifications, and pay scales are identical to their government counterparts and that the exclusion was an inadvertent omission in the rules.

Findings of Court:
The court noted that there is no intelligible differentia between principals in the aided sector and those in the government sector to justify differential treatment. Recent government orders specifically intended to remove such anomalies by extending the existing exemptions to the aided sector for principals. As these orders are curative and clarify the law, they must be applied to rectify the discriminatory practice of withholding service benefits.

Issues: Whether the denial of permanent exemption from passing departmental tests to aided school principals after attaining the age of 50 years, when such exemption is available to government school counterparts, violates the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of any intelligible differentia, treating employees performing identical duties, possessing the same qualifications, and serving under the same statutory framework differently regarding test exemptions is arbitrary and discriminatory. Statutory provisions or executive orders that are merely clarificatory/curative in nature to remove anomalies operate to affirm the pre-existing entitlement of employees to equal service conditions.

Result: Writ petitions allowed. Respondents directed to grant full service benefits and increments to the petitioners.