SALEELA Vs. LAILA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.7713 of 2022, which was one filed invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P13 order dtd. 20/9/2021 of the 3 rd respondent Assistant Educational Officer, Chathannoor; a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the management of Thazhuthala Muslim U.P. School alone has the right to appoint a person of its choice in the school and not the Manager, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Manager, Corporate Educational Agency v. James Mathew [(2017) 15 SCC 595]; and a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that Ext.P4 proceedings dtd. 31/6/2021 and Ext.P7 proceedings dtd. 12/6/2021 of the 1st respondent Manager are illegal, arbitrary and against Ext.P18 bye-law of the corporate body managing Thazhuthala Muslim U.P. School.

(2.) Going by the averments in the writ petition, the appellant-petitioner, who was appointed as U.P. School Assistant (later redesignated as U.P. School Teacher) in Thazhuthala Muslim U.P. School on 19/12/1990, is the seniormost U.P. School Teacher (UPST) as per Ext.P1 seniority list prepared as on 1/1/2021. Since the incumbent holding the post of the Headmaster is retiring on 31/5/2021, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 representation dtd. 31/5/2021 before the 1st respondent Manager (the then Manager) claiming promotion as the Headmistress of the school, under Rule 44 of Chapter XIVA of the Kerala Education Rules (KER). She has also preferred Ext.P3 representation dtd. 31/5/2021 before the Headmaster of the school. According to the petitioner, though Thazhuthala Muslim U.P. School is under corporate management, the 1st respondent Manager had individually taken a decision to promote the 2nd respondent, who is junior to the petitioner, as the Headmistress of the school.

(3.) On 29/5/2024, when W.P.(C)No.7713 of 2022 came up for admission, the learned Single Judge admitted the matter on file. The 1st respondent Manager (the then Manager) filed a counter affidavit dtd. 7/3/2023, opposing the reliefs sought for in the writ petition, producing therewith Exts.R1A to R1M documents. The 2nd respondent filed a counter affidavit dtd. 28/10/2023, opposing the reliefs sought for in the writ petition, producing therewith Exts.R2(a) to R2(e) documents. The 4 th respondent District Educational Officer filed a counter affidavit dtd. 18/2/2022, opposing the reliefs sought for in the writ petition. The present Manager of the school, who was impleaded as additional 8th respondent, filed a counter affidavit dtd. 18/6/2023, producing therewith Ext.R8 document. The petitioner filed a reply affidavit dtd. 22/4/2023 to the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, producing therewith Ext.P19 document; and a reply affidavit dtd. 22/11/2023 to the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, producing therewith Exts.P20 and P21 documents.