Back
2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 51907
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J
RASHIL RAVINDRAN V K – Appellant
Versus
ADDL R4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 36873/2015
Timely application submission is essential under Rule 51B for claiming an appointment, requiring a factual determination by the relevant educational authority.
Headnote:
Employment - Claim for Appointment - Rule 51B - The judgment discussed the procedural requirements under Rule 51B pertaining to claims for appointments following the death of a teacher and the need for timely applications within a specific period after such an event.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner claimed rights to an appointment under Rule 51B following his father's death. Questions arose regarding the validity of an application purportedly submitted and its timing relative to government regulations.
Finding of the Court:
The court determined that discrepancies between submitted applications required a factual assessment by the District Educational Officer to resolve the matter fairly.
Issues: Whether the application for appointment under Rule 51B was submitted within the permissible timeframe and the validity of the evidence supporting this claim.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the determination of employment claims must consider evidentiary timelines and relevant regulations, necessitating a factual hearing.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of directing the District Educational Officer to resolve the claim efficiently.
JUDGMENT
The dispute in these writ petitions is in regard to the application submitted by the petitioner Sri.Rashil Ravindran V.K. in W.P.(C)No.36873/2015. He is a Rule 51B claimant. His father Sri.Ravindran expired on 28/06/2009. The case of Sri. Rashil Ravindran is that, he made an application on 15/07/2009 before the Headmaster. The Manager's stand is that no such application was submitted before him and Ext.P6 application dated 15/07/2009 produced in the above writ petition is a fabricated one in collusion with the retired Headmaster of the school.
2. The petitioner filed Ext.P10 application dated 17/08/2009 before the Assistant Educational Officer. The Assistant Educational Officer directed Sri.Rashil Ravindran to approach the Manager with a letter dated 15/09/2009.
3. Admittedly, a vacancy arose in this school only on 01/06/2015 consequent upon the retirement of the Headmaster. The claim under Rule 51B depend upon the application made by Sri. Rashil Ravindran. If Sri. Rashil Ravindran had submitted the application within time, he would be entitled for that post and there cannot be any dispute on this. If he had not made any application, such claim would be barred by relevant Government Orders, in the sense, such application had to be filed within two years reckoning from the date of the death of the teacher concerned. Sri. Rashil Ravindran was major at the time of death of his father. In view of the serious disputed question of facts involved, it is appropriate for the District Educational Officer to take a decision after hearing the Manager as well as Sri. Rashil Ravindran. The Manager had approached this Court in WP(C)No. 5281/2016 challenging an Order passed by the Assistant Educational Officer directing to give employment to Sri.Rashil Ravindran.
Thus, the writ petition is disposed with following directions:
1. The District Educational Officer, Kannur shall take a decision after adverting the facts involved as above within a period of two months.
2. Both parties should be given opportunity to produce evidence.
3. The claim of Sri. Rashil Ravindran depend upon the decision of the District Educational Officer.
The approval of the other appointments made by the Manager will depend upon the decision in this matter.
Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 36873/2015 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 EXHIBIT-P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 05.01.2013 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, THALASSERY.
EXHIBIT P2 EXHIBIT-P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF SERVICE PARTICULARAS OF DECEASED PENSIONER STARTING HIS DATE OF DEATH.
EXHIBIT P3 EXHIBIT-P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIF CERTIFICATE DATED 6.11.2009 ISSUED BY THE THAHAZILDAR, THALASSERY.
EXHIBIT P4 EXHIBIT-P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE S.S.L.C.
CERTIFICATE MARCH 2005 OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5 EXHIBIT-P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE TRAINED TEACHER'S CERTIFICATE DATED 9.7.2013 OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P6 EXHIBIT-P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 15.7.2009 BEFORE THE MANAGER (R2) FOR APPOINTMENT AS LP SCHOOL ASSISTANT.
EXHIBIT P7 EXHIBIT-P7: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 21.3.2015 BEFORE THE MANAGER (R2) FOR APPOINTMENT AS LP SCHOOL ASSISTANT.
EXHIBIT P8 EXHIBIT-P8: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT AEO WITH A DIRECTION TO APPOINT THE PETITIONER IN THE EXISTING VACANCY DATED 30.6.2015.
EXHIBIT P9 EXHIBIT-P9: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT MANAGER DATED 21.9.2015 REJECTING CHAPTER XIV-A RULE 51B CLAIM OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT FOR THE POST OF LPSA DATED
17.08.2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER RTI ACT (QUESTION AND ANSWER)
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R3(a) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE GO(P)NO.12/99/P&ARD DATED 24.05.1999 EXHIBIT R3(b) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE POSTAL COVER APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5281/2016 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT.
21/3/15 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE
