IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2008 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1930 WA.No. 2374 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.15099/2007 Dated 18/11/2008 .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD & 4TH RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. DR.P.V.JOSEPH, XIX/256, PUKKUNEL HOUSE, PUTHUPADY P.O., MOOVATTUPUZHA-73. 2. MANAGER, FR.JOSEPH M.H.S.SCHOOL, MUVATTUPUZHA-73. BY ADV. SRI.ELDHOSE ELIAS RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1,2: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. BINCY VARGHEESE, H.S.A (MATHS) FR.JOSEPH MEMORIAL, HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. JEENA T.S., H.S.A(MALAYALAM), -DO-...DO.... 3. USHA.M.S., H.S.A (HINDI), -D0-....DO..... 4. SMITHA.T, U.P.S.A, -DO-....DO.... 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM. 6. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTHAMANGALAM. ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. FOR R1 TO R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SANDESH RAJA FOR R5 & R6 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/12/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A.No.2374 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated 12th December, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Four teachers appointed on 5.6.2006 in the Fr.Joseph Memorial Higher Secondary School, Puthupady, Muvattupuzha approached this court stating that even though they are working for about two years, their appointments are not approved and, therefore, they are entitled for approval of their service. Learned Judge directed to grant approval as they were appointed by the defacto Manager. It is not disputed that one Prasad P Varghese (brother of the appellant who is the fourth respondent in the writ petition) was the Manager of the School and his appointment was approved by Ext.P14 order dated 6.5.1978. Later, appellant was elected as the Manager by the Corporate management on 2.2.2001. His appointment was approved by Ext.P19 order dated 3.7.2001. But, that order was set aside by the Director of Public Instruction by Ext.P20 order. District Educational Officer appointed Sri.Prasad P.Varghese as the Manager by Ext.P21. A revision petition filed by the appellant against Ext.P20 order was also rejected by Ext.P22. Even though Exts.P20 and P22 orders were set aside by this court in O.P.No.20324 of 2002, that judgment was reversed by Ext.P24 W.A.No.2374/2008 2 judgment of a Division Bench of this court and it was directed that Ext.P22 shall be considered by the Director of Public Instruction. That management dispute between these two brothers, Sri.Prasad P. Varghese and appellant herein is still pending at various stages. We are not expressing any opinion regarding the management dispute in this proceedings. It is not disputed that there were four vacancies of substantial teachers in 2006. Students cannot study without teachers. One important factor is that students should not suffer for lack of teachers. The above four teachers are fully qualified and they were doing the work. There was no other rival teachers and all the time during the relevant period Sri.Prasad P Varghese was acting as the Manager. He was a defacto Manager. It is true that at the time when appointments were made Exts.P20 and P22 orders were set aside by Ext.P23 and Ext.P23 was set aside by Ext.P24 judgment of the Division Bench. The learned single Judge in the impugned judgment found that appointments made by the defacto Manager for substantial vacancies by qualified teachers need not be changed even if it is found that Manager's appointment was illegal and relied on a Division Bench decision of this court in Manager, St.Mary's H.S. v. Beji Abraham (2002(1) KLT 406) and Padmanabhan Nambiar v. Government of Kerala (1997 (2) KLT 725). On the facts of this case, we are not inclined to admit the writ appeal, but, at the same time, we W.A.No.2374/2008 3 make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion regarding the Management dispute between the parties. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE tks