Rayes V. S vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 31, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1355425

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1355425
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Viju Abraham
Decided On: May 31, 2023
Case Number: WP(C)/13612/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rayes V. S

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....by ext.p7 order of rejection, the petitioner has preferred ext.p8 representation before the 3rd respondent, deputy director of education(dde).3. heard the learned government pleader also, who uponinstructions submitted that the claim of the petitioner for grade w.p.(c). no.13612 of 2023 :3: promotion can be considered only after regularisation of the break in service and after a proposal to that effect is submitted by the headmaster of the school. after hearing both sides, i am inclined to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 3 rd respondent to consider and pass orders on ext.p6, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the 5 th respondent and the headmaster. the 3rd respondent shall take a final decision in the matter within an outer limit of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment.sd/- viju abraham judge sm/ w.p.(c). no.13612 of 2023 :4: appendix of wp(c) 13612/2023 petitioner exhibits exhibit p1 true copy of the appointment order dated 1-7-2013 exhibit p2 true copy of the judgement dated 24-7-2013 in w.p.(c) no.17002 of 2013 exhibit p3 true copy of the letter dated 18-6-2016 of the 5th respondent exhibit p4 true copy of the judgement dated 9-11-2016 in w.p.(c) no. 22534 of 2013 exhibit p5 . true copy of the letter dated 19-3-2022 of the district education officer, chavakkad exhibit p6 . true copy of the representation dated 22-4-2022 submitted to the district education officer exhibit p7 true copy of letter dated 7-12-2022 issued by the 4th respondent exhibit p8 true copy of representation dated 15-11- 20122 to the deputy director of education

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2023 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 13612 OF 2023 PETITIONER: RAYES V. S AGED 31 YEARS VADASSERY HOUSE, MAZHUVANCHERRY, ERANELLUR P.O., THRISSUR, PIN - 680501 BY ADV K.P.SANTHI RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014 3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680003 4 DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR, PIN - 680506 5 CORPORATE MANAGER CMS CORPORATE MANAGEMENT, COCHIN AREA, ROUND WEST THRISSUR, PIN - 680001

OTHER PRESENT: GP - SUNILKUMAR KURIAKOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). No.13612 of 2023 :2:

VIJU ABRAHAM, J.

W.P.(C). No.13612 of 2023 Dated this the 31st day of May, 2023

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to respondents 3 and 4 to grant grade promotion.

2. Though the petitioner completed 9 years of service and

was entitled for the grade promotion, the same was denied by the 4th respondent stating that the said claim can be considered only after regularisation of break in service and after a proposal to that effect has been submitted by the Headmaster of the school. Thereupon the petitioner has preferred Ext.P6 representation to the District Education Officer(DEO) to grant grade promotion and seniority legitimately due to him, which was rejected by Ext.P7

order intimating that only after regularisation of the break in

service, the claim for grade promotion can be considered. Aggrieved by Ext.P7 order of rejection, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P8 representation before the 3rd respondent, Deputy Director of Education(DDE).

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also, who upon

instructions submitted that the claim of the petitioner for grade W.P.(C). No.13612 of 2023 :3: promotion can be considered only after regularisation of the break in service and after a proposal to that effect is submitted by the Headmaster of the school. After hearing both sides, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 3 rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the 5 th respondent and the Headmaster. The 3rd respondent shall take a final decision in the matter within an outer limit of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

Sd/- VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE sm/ W.P.(C). No.13612 of 2023 :4: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13612/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1-7-2013 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 24-7-2013 IN W.P.(C) NO.17002 OF 2013 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18-6-2016 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 9-11-2016 IN W.P.(C) NO. 22534 OF 2013 Exhibit P5 . TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19-3-2022 OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD Exhibit P6 . TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22-4-2022 SUBMITTED TO THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 7-12-2022 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 15-11- 20122 TO THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Rayes V. S vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Viju Abraham