IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 15TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 85 of 2011(I) -------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- KHADEEJA PICHEN, ARABIC TEACHER, A.U.P.S., VELLIYANCHERI, RESIDING AT PICHEN HOUSE, PADINHATTUMMURI P.O., (VIA) KOOTTILANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI. S.P. ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT. N. SANTHA SRI. K.A. BALAN SRI. PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI. ANAND S.A. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MELATTUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 326. 2. THE MANAGER, A.U.P.SCHOOL, VELLIYANCHERI, (VIA) MELATTUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 326. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.T. MUHAMOOD R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 85 of 2011(I) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO. K.DIS.C/2123/2006 DATED 7.11.2006 OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCAITONAL OFFICER, MELATTUR. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 2.6.2008 OF THE MANAGER AUP SCHOOL, VELLIYANCHERI. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K.DIS.C/2780/08 DATED 16.2.2009 OF THE AEO, MELATTUR. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED IN W.P.(C) NO. 19678/2008-P 14.10.2009 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE LETTER NO.C/5649/09/K.DIS DATED 24.5.2010 OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCAITONAL OFFICER, MELATTUR. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.3.2010 IN W.A.2839/09. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.85 Of 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011 J U D G M E N T The challenge is against Exhibit P5 order passed by the 1st respondent rejecting the application for approval stating that the application cannot be considered in the light of a dispute regarding Managership pending before this Court in Writ Appeal No.2839/2009 and in the light of the interim order passed in the said case. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a claimant under Rule 51A of Chapter XIV-A of KER and any inter se dispute with regard to Managership cannot defeat the rights of the petitioner for approval. It is also pointed out that in Exhibit P4 judgment the petitioner is not arrayed as a respondent also. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Manager submitted that even though in Exhibit P4 judgment this Court accepted the validity of appointments made on 2.6.2008, by applying the defacto doctrine, the said judgment is under appeal in Writ Appeal No.2839/2009 and this Court has passed an order of stay also. 4. Evidently, the petitioner herein was not arrayed as a respondent in the said Writ Petition, 19672/2008 and in the Writ Appeal. Therefore, evidently, nobody had raised any complaint regarding the appointment of the petitioner in the School. Therefore, it is evident that the interim order W.P.(C)No.85/11 -2- passed in the Writ Appeal cannot stand in the way of considering the application for grant of approval of the petitioner. It is pointed out that the appointment of the petitioner from 5.6.2006 to 11.6.2001 was approved as per Exhibit P1. The petitioner was appointed in a retirement vacancy which arose on 30.6.2007. It is the case of the petitioner that any dispute regarding Managership cannot defeat the rights of the petitioner under Rule 51A of Chapter XIV-A of KER also. 5. Therefore, Exhibit P5 order is quashed. There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders on the proposal for approval within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn True copy P.A.to Judge