IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2010 / 30TH ASHADHA 1932 WA.No. 265 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.6507/2009 Dated 16/09/2009 .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE WP ----------------------------------- 1. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM DIST. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM DIST. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY G.P. SMT.T.B.RAMANI RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS IN THE WP ------------------------------------ 1. SAYYID MUHAMMED RAFEEK. K. UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT,(UPSA),AIDED HIGH SCHOOL,PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. VIDHU.P., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT,(UPSA),AIDED HIGH SCHOOL,PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. NIMA.A.M. UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT,(UPSA),AIDED HIGH SCHOOL,PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. SHAHIDA.A.T., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT,(UPSA),AIDED HIGH SCHOOL,PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. ANEESH BABU.O., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT,(UPSA),AIDED HIGH SCHOOL,PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. SAKKEER HUSSAIN.T.P. UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT,(UPSA),AIDED HIGH SCHOOL,PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE ABRAHAM THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ALONG WITH W.A. NOS.183,1199&1217 OF 2010 ON 21/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal Nos.265,183,1199 & 1217 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 21st day of July, 2010. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The connected appeals are filed by the State challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge holding that under Rule 6(VIII) of Chapter-V K.E.R. the school managements which have executed agreements with Government in terms of the Rule, have no responsibility to appoint protected teachers from outside the educational district. Even though Government Pleader referred to Section 13 of the Education Act, we do not find any specific provision therein requiring the management to appoint protected teachers from outside the educational district in which the educational institution of the management is located. In these cases specific agreements are executed in terms of the above Rule under which managements were bound to appoint teachers protected in the educational districts wherein their schools are located. The learned Single Judge rightly held that the respondents are not bound to appoint protected teachers from outside W.A. 265/2010& conn. 2 the educational district. When the Government through the Rule itself restricted the scope of responsibility of the management to appoint protected teachers by limiting their liability to such of the teachers protected within the educational district, obviously without Government amending the Rule applicable to protected teachers available within a Revenue District or all over the State, they cannot contend otherwise. The learned Single Judge rightly upheld the claim of the managements to appoint teachers of their choice in terms of the provisions of the Rule, if no protected teacher is available in their educational district. Since the appellants have no case that respondents have violated the terms of the agreement or the Rule, there is no scope for interference with the judgment. Writ Appeals are consequently dismissed. However, taking into account the increased number of teachers going to the protected class in certain areas, it is for the Government to consider amendment to the Rule so that protected teachers are accommodated in schools anywhere in the State. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms