IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933 OP.No. 15541 of 2002(A) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S) :- ------------------------ V. PREMLAL, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 49 YEARS, HEADMASTER, NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, ENGANDIYUR, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED RESPONDENT(S) :- -------------------------- 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, NATINAL HIGH SCHOOL, ENGANDIYUR, THRISSUR. 4. SMT. C.S. GIRIJA, FORMERLY HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT & HEADMISTRESS, NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, ENGANDIYUR, THRISSUR. (RESIDING AT VADUKKUNCHERRY, ENGANDIYOR-680 615). ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA BABU THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt OP.No. 15541 of 2002 APPENDIX Petitioner's Exhibits :- Ext.P1 :- Copy of the G.O. (Rt) No.2040/99/G.Edn. Of the Government. Ext.P2 :- Copy of the Order No.Ex./C/CA/OB/3 of the Commissioner for Govt. Exam. Ext.P3 :- Copy of the representation submitted before the 1st respondent. Ext.P4 :- Copy of the G.O.(Rt)No.868/2002/G.Edn. Of the Government. Respondent's Exhibits :- NIL //True Copy// P.A. to Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- O.P. No.15541 of 2002 --------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of June 2011 J U D G M E N T Prayers in this writ petition are the following :- “(a) call for the records relating to Exhibit P-4 and quash the original of the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order. (b) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner as Headmaster with effect from 1-4-2000 with all attendant benefits in National High School, Engandiyur considering his seniority as per Rule 37 (1) of Chapter XIV-A Kerala Education Rules. (c) declare that the grant of deemed seniority to the 4th respondent as per G.O. (Rt) No.675/87/G. Edn. Dated 3-5-1987 as illegal and inconsistent with Rule 37 (1) of Chapter XIV-A Kerala Education Rules.” 2. According to the petitioner, he commenced service as HSA on 9.7.1979 whereas the 4th respondent commenced service only on 1.6.1983. It is stated that a vacancy of Headmaster arose on 1.4.2000 and that without O.P. No.15541 of 2002 -: 2 :- considering his seniority 4th respondent was appointed. He challenged the appointment of 4th respondent as Headmistress by filing representation before the Government. Pursuant to the directions of this Court in the judgment in O.P. No.19114/2001, the representation was considered and rejected by Ext.P4 order. The main reason stated in Ext.P4 order is that by G.O (Rt) No.675/87/G.Edn dated 3.5.1987, the Government had ordered that the 4th respondent would be given seniority with effect from 30.1.1976 in the cadre of HSA and that therefore, 4th respondent is senior to the petitioner. It is in this background the writ petition is filed seeking the prayers mentioned above. 3. Contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the seniority assigned to the 4th respondent as per the Government Order dated 3.5.1987 is against Rule 37(1) of Chapter XIV-A of KER. However, from the pleadings what has seen is that even though the 4th O.P. No.15541 of 2002 -: 3 :- respondent was assigned deemed seniority as per the Government Order dated 3.5.1987 except in this original petition which was filed on 5.6.2002, at no point of time did the petitioner challenge the said order. The challenge now raised against in this writ petition is belated and I am not in a position to entertain the same. If that be so, 4th respondent is entitled to carry seniority with effect from 30.1.1976. Consequently, 4th respondent is entitled to be treated senior to the petitioner, who admittedly commenced service as HSA only with effect from 9.7.1979. In such circumstances, neither the Government Order dated 3.5.1987 nor Ext.P1 or Ext.P4, which are consequential in nature, call for interference in this writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. Jvt