PANKAJAKSY Vs. GEORGE MATHEW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHIEF Justice M. S. Menon speaking for the Full Bench, in his inimitable style, in Rt. Rev. A. M. Patroni v. Kesavan (1964 KLT 791) stated thus: "the post of the headmaster is of pivotal importance in the life of a school. Around him wheels the tone and temper of the institution; on him depends the continuity of its traditions, the maintenance of discipline and the efficiency of its teaching. The right to choose the headmaster is perhaps the most important facet of the right to administer a school."

(2.) THE Government prescribed the requisite qualifications for appointment to the post of headmaster of aided Lower Primary Schools as early as 1978. However, these essential qualifications remained a statutory dream for about ten years, with exemption being granted for one, two or three years at a time, but extended periodically to continue uninterruptedly. THE last amendment, the latest exemption for two years from 1-4-1986 to 31-3-1988 was effected to R. 45b (3) of the Kerala Education Rules on 2nd September, 1986. Teachers fully qualified, claiming promotion as headmasters therefore challenged the validity of this amendment as beyond the powers conferred under the Kerala Education Act and as violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution. THE relaxation of the minimum standards for an unusually long period of ten years possibly shocked the judicial conscience and a learned single judge upheld the challenge and struck down rule relating to relaxation from 1-4-1986 to 31-3-1988. Aggrieved, the teachers who, from 1978, did not acquire the minimum qualifications for the post of headmasters, some of whom never even attempted to secure these qualifications, have filed these writ appeals against the judgment of the learned single judge. THE State also challenged the decision by filing two appeals; but better sense prevailed and they withdrew those appeals and they have been dismissed. THE Government Pleader appealing for the State submitted that the Government have accepted the decision of the learned single judge and have issued consequential orders in implementation of the Judgment. Thus the author of the amendment, the Government itself does not support the amendment and the exemption form 1-4-1986 to 31-3-1988 it is in this background that we have to consider these appeals.

(3.) IT has to be borne in mind that the rules are framed by virtue of the powers conferred under S. 36 of the Kerala Education Act. The grounds that are available for the challenge of a rule made by a delegated authority have to be outlined first, before the contentions advanced to challenge the rules are considered. Fortunately, there is at present, no problem on this score, because the Supreme Court has spoken in clear terms on this aspect on several occasions, and we need refer only to some of the later pronouncements.