IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 28223 of 2007(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- K.SADATH, MYLISSERY, CHERIYA KUMBALAM, PALERI P.O., KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. (FORMERLY ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.I.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI). BY ADV. SRI.AVM.SALAHUDIN SMT.VIJAYAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUNNUMMAL, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, M.I.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. P.JAMEELA, ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.I.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 5. PREMANAND, M.I.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 6. SAREENA K.K., M.I.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 7. SHYAMA, M.I.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 8. SHEEJA, M.I.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. W.P.(C) NO.28223/2007 *ADDL. R9 TO R10 ARE IMPLEADED 9. DUNA ASST. TEACHER, M.I.U .P. SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 10. BEENA , ASST. TEACHER, M.I.U.P SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. ADDL. R9 & R10 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 19.10.07 IN IA. 13770/2007. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MOHAMOOD ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNAN FOR R3 SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.28223/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF REMOVAL DT. 6.10.01 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 4.10.01 ISSUED 2ND RESPONDENT TO 3RD RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 16.8.02 ISSUED BY IST RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 26.10.06 IN WPC. NO.35469/02. P5:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 8.12.06 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. P6:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 11.7.07 ISSUED BY IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.28223/2007 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an Arabic Teacher, who has approved service under the 3rd respondent, for various spells of time. The last spell of his service was for the period from 15.7.2001 t0 14.7.2006. During this period of his employment, the petitioner got himself implicated in a criminal case and was arrested on 28.7.2001. He was enlarged on bail on 1.10.2001. By Ext.P1 order dated 6.10.2001, based on Ext.P2 letter of the AEO, the Manager issued notice removing him from service with effect from 28.7.2001. 2. He challenged Ext.P2 and ultimately the Government by Ext.P3 order confirmed Ext.P2. During this period petitioner was contesting the criminal case and finally by WP(c).No.28223/07 2 judgment dated 29.8.2006 in S.C.No.705/2003, it is stated that he was acquitted by the Sessions court and that judgment has been confirmed by this court in Crl.R.P.No.1809/06 by judgment dated 18.12.2006. 3. Meanwhile claiming reinstatement petitioner filed O.P.No.35469/2002 before this court. That Original Petition was disposed of directing the petitioner to represent the matter before the Government. It is stated that, accordingly he filed Ext.P5, which was disposed of by Ext.P6 order dated 11.7.2009. Though in Ext.P6, the Government held that, the review is not maintainable as Ext.P3 was not an original order, still it was clarified that the petitioner will be entitled for appointment in future as provided under Rule 51-A of Chapter XIV-A KER. It is at this stage, the petitioner filed this writ petition, seeking to quash Exts.P1, P2,P3 and P6 and to direct the respondents to reinstate him. 4. Admittedly, the service of the petitioner up to 14.7.2001 was approved service. Though he was again WP(c).No.28223/07 3 appointed on 15.7.2001, during this period of service, he was arrested in a criminal case and consequently by Ext.P1 he was removed from service with effect from 28.7.2001. Though this service may not be of any assistance to the petitioner to claim the benefit of Rule 51-A, still having regard to the fact that the petitioner has previous approved service, Government granted the benefit of Rule 51-A Chapter XIV-A KER as put forth in Ext.P6. In my view, the petitioner has been rightly granted the benefit in Ext.P6. Petitioner now contends that, his claim for the benefit of Rule 51-A having been recognized in Ext.P6, he ought to have been considered against the vacancies to which respondents 4 to 10 were appointed. Obviously, his claim for the benefit of Rule 51-A was recognized only by Ext.P6 dated 11.7.2007 and the aforesaid appointees were all appointed prior to that Government Order. In my view, it is alson not possible to disturb their appointment as Ext.P6 order was passed without notice to those appointees. WP(c).No.28223/07 4 Therefore, the petitioner's claim will have to be confined to the next arising suitable vacancy in which case the Manager shall consider the petitioner's candidature against that vacancy. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. WP(c).No.28223/07 5