Y. SUNILKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was appointed as Instructor in Computer Application at the Vocational Higher Secondary School, Kumbalam under the management of the 3rd respondent, on 19 -11 -2001. The appointment was on the basis of selection conducted by a committee, which included the Assistant Director of Vocational Higher Secondary Education, Kollam as the Government nominee. The petitioner was having qualification of Degree in Mathematics (B.Sc.) and Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Application (PGDCA) with 66% marks. At the time when the petitioner was appointed no statutory special rules or executive orders are prevailing with respect to prescription of qualification of the teaching staff in Vocational Higher Secondary Schools. The Department was following the draft rules framed for the purpose of appointment and approval of teaching staffs. Appointment of the petitioner was not approved by the 2nd respondent stating the reason that he was not qualified to be selected as Instructor in Computer Application. Exhibit P1 letter issued by the 2nd respondent in this regard was replied by the 3rd respondent stating that, the petitioner was appointed based on the qualification possessed by him as described above and that there was no qualification specifically prescribed to the effect that the candidate should have secured 1st class in Post Graduate Diploma. On receipt of Ext. P2 the 2nd respondent again replied that, the Government had informed that the appointment cannot be approved since the petitioner do not possess the required qualification as per the draft special rules. Eventhough the 3rd respondent had approached the Government seeking approval, it was rejected through Ext. P4 assigning the very same reason. It is aggrieved by Exts. P1, P3 & P4, this writ petition is filed. Inter alia, the petitioner seeks direction for approval of his appointment on the basis of Ext. P6 special rules.

(2.) IT is pointed out that the Government have framed Ext. P6 special rules with effect from 12 -03 -2004. The qualification prescribed for appointment as Instructor in Computer Application is, Post Graduate Diploma in Computer with not less than 60% marks from a State/Central Government institution or any other institution recognised by AICTE or an equivalent Graduation in Physics/Mathematics/Computer Science/Computer Application. It is stated that on the basis of Ext. P6 special rules appointment of the petitioner was approved with effect from 12 -04 -2004 onwards. Therefore the issue remaining for decision is only with respect to approval of the appointment for the period from 19 -11 -2001 to 11 -03 -2004.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner pointed out that there existed no statutory rules or executive orders at the time when the petitioner was appointed. It is not disputed that the selection of the petitioner was made by a committee consisting of a Government nominee, the Assistant Director. Contention of the respondents is that the petitioner had not possessed the requisite qualification as per the draft special rules, at the time of appointment. Learned counsel had produced copy of the draft special rules framed by the Government, which prescribes the qualification for the post of 'Vocational Instructor' by direct recruitment. But in the annexure attaches to the special rules wherein qualification with respect to 'Vocational Instructors' are prescribed, the instructor in the subject of Computer Application is not seen included. As such, contention that the petitioner was not having the requisite qualification as per the draft special rules, is not true and correct. Despite the specific contention taken, the respondents are not in a position to produce any draft special rules, nor they could produce any other materials to show that the qualification prescribed under the draft special rules insisted 1st class in the Post Graduate Diploma.