IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 10409 of 2007(L) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ THE CORPORATE MANAGER, HOLY ANGELS CONVENT SCHOOL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCTION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASST. EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, NEYYATTINKARA. 3. SMT.MARY TELMA, SEWING TEACHER, ST.TERESA'S CONVENT L.P.SCHOOL, NEYYATTINKARA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T. MOHAMOOD FOR R1& R2 ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.10409/2007 L APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.1610/92/G.EDN. DTD. 06/05/2992 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF LETTER NO.28601/R3/G.E.DTD.09/01/1993 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 02/03/1996 VACATING THE STAY ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.108/01/G.EDN. DTD. 23/03/2001 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.3905/97/G.EDN. DTD. 11/11/1997. EXT.P6: COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.76/98/G.EDN. DTD. 06/01/1998. EXT.P7: COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.2437/98/G.EDN. DTD. 23/06/1998. EXT.P8: COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.4613/98/G.EDN. DTD. 28/11/1998. EXT.P9: COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.3145/2000/G.EDN. DTD. 29/07/2000. EXT.P10: COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.4107/2000/G.EDN. DTD. 10/10/2000. EXT.P11: COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD. 09/10/2006 IN OP.NO.13784/2002N. EXT.P12: COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.800/2007/G.EDN. DTD. 21/02/2007 PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT: EXT.R3(A): COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 05/06/1990. EXT.R3(B): COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 23/08/2007 OF THE A.E.O., NEYYATTINKARA. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.10409/2007 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P12, an order passed by the first respondent in pursuance to Ext.P11 judgment rendered by this court. Petitioner appointed the 3rd respondent as a Sewing Teacher with effect from 5.6.1990. Approval was rejected in view of Rule 2(3) of Chapter XXIII KER as clarified by the Government Order dated 22.8.1989 and circular of the DPI dated 15.5.1990. The rejection of approval was confirmed by all authorities including the Government by Ext.P1. Subsequently, relying on Exts.P4 to P10, the 3rd respondent filed O.P.No.13784/2002, which was disposed of by this court by Ext.P11 judgment. In pursuance there of the Government passed Ext.P12, the operative portion of which is as follows; WP(c).No.10409/2007 2 "In the above circumstances, the Assistant Educational Officer, Neyyattinkara is directed to take immediate steps to approve the appointment of the petitioner, Smt. Mary Telma, Sewing Teacher, St.Therese's Convent L.P.School,Neyyattinkara,Thiruvananthapurm, and to disburse consequential benefits, immediately, subject to the condition that the amount so paid to the petitioner will be recovered from the Manager of the school who made the irregular appointment, by initiating Revenue Recovery proceedings, invoking Section 8 of the Kerala Education Act, 1958." 2. Admittedly, the petitioner was not heard before Ext.P12 order was passed, but however it is ordered that the amount paid to the 3rd respondent will be recovered from the Manager on the ground that the appointment made WP(c).No.10409/2007 3 was irregular. In my view, Ext.P12 to the extent it directs recovery from the petitioner needs to be invalidated for the reason that the said order was passed without putting the petitioner on notice or hearing her. Therefore there is violation of principles of natural justice and prejudice has been caused. Accordingly, Ext.P12 to the extent it made liable the petitioner for the amount paid to the 3rd respondent and directed recovery by initiating revenue recovery proceedings is quashed. The first respondent shall issue notice to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in this matter. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. WP(c).No.10409/2007 4