IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2009 / 28TH ASWINA 1931 WA.No. 2899 of 2007() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.25872/2000 Dated 06/10/2006 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER IN THE WPC ----------------------------------- MINI THOMAS, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MALAYALAM), ST.MARY'S GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL, MUTTOM, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN THE WPC ------------------------------------- 1. THE MANAGER, CORPORATE MANAGEMENT OF HOLE FAMILY HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL AND ST.MARY'S GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL, MUTTOM, CHERTHALA. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION (T) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT ANNEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SMT.LISSA KURIAN, PART-TIME MALAYALAM LECTURER, HOLY FAMILY HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, CHERTHALA. 5. SMT.MARY K.V., HSA (MALAYALAM), ST.MARY'S GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL, CHERTHALA. ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN FOR R1, SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN FOR R1 SRI.K.T.THOMAS FOR R1 SRI.KURIAN ANTONY EDASSERY FOR R.4, SMT.ANN EMIL JOSEPH FOR R.4 SRI.MICHAEL POOVATHANY FOR R.4 GP SMT.R.BINDU FOR R2 AND R3 SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ, FOR R5 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------ WA No.2899 of 2007-E ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated 20th October 2009 Judgment Balakrishnan Nair, J. The writ petitioner is the appellant. The brief facts of the case are the following : 2. The appellant was a UPSA working in one of the schools managed by the 1st respondent. While so, a vacancy arose in the cadre of HSST (Malayalam) in one of the higher secondary schools of the 1st respondent. The Manager constituted a selection committee and the claims of all qualified Teachers were considered. The 4th respondent, who was an HSA (Malayalam), was Rank No.1 in the select list and therefore, she was appointed to that post. Ext.P5 is the appointment order. In the vacancy created by the promotion of the 4th respondent, the appellant was appointed as HSA (Malayalam). Feeling aggrieved by the appointment of the 4th respondent as HSST (Malayalam) and her non-selection to the said post, the Writ Petition was filed. The main contention taken in the Writ Petition was that the selection committee was not constituted as provided under Ext.P3 circular issued by the Director of Higher Secondary Education. The WA 2899/07 2 learned Single Judge prima facie accepted the said contention and by way of an interim order, directed the Manager to constitute a proper committee in terms of Ext.P3 and make a fresh selection. A fresh selection was made by a newly constituted Committee, in which the Regional Deputy Director of Higher Secondary Education, Ernakulam was the Government nominee. The said committee also selected the 4th respondent. The learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides, finally dismissed the Writ Petition. Hence this appeal. 3. The appellant submits, the constitution of the second selection committee was also bad for inclusion of the Regional Deputy Director of Higher Secondary Education, Ernakulam, as the school was outside his jurisdiction. According to the Manager, the Regional Deputy Director of Higher Secondary Education, Thiruvananthapuram is the Officer to approve the appointment and therefore, an Officer from outside was included in the Committee. 4. Every irregularity in the selection process will not invalidate the selection, unless prejudice is shown. We do not find that any prejudice has been caused to the appellant by the presence of the Regional Deputy Director, Ernakulam in the selection committee. Further, we notice that the appellant is claiming selection in WA 2899/07 3 preference to the 4th respondent, who is admittedly an HSA (Malayalam). Normally, in these types of selections, the persons in the higher grade will be preferred first and only in their absence, persons in the lower grade will be considered. Such selection will be in the interest of senior teachers also. When HSAs are available, if persons in the lower grade are selected, the same is sure to demoralise the High School teachers and the Manager will be accused of having selected persons of his choice. So, we find nothing illegal or irregular about the selection of the 4th respondent in preference to the appellant, who is only a UPSA. Therefore, no grounds are made out to interfere with the judgment under appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta WA 2899/07 4 WA 2899/07 5