THE MANAGER, vs SRI.FAZIL E. & ORS

The challenge is against Ext.P1 order of the Tribunal, whereby the petitioner herein has been directed to consider and pass appropriate orders

on Annexure.A15 representation as to the extension sought for retention or for appointment against the post of State Co-ordinator in Career

Guidance and Counselling. The OA was filed with the following prayers:

In view of the facts and grounds mentioned in para 6 above, the applicant prays for the following reliefs:

i) call for the records leading to Annexure A20 and set aside the same.

ii) issue a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the applicant for appointment to the post of State Co-ordinator in Career

Guidance and Counselling.

iii) issue a declaration, declaring that the applicant is entitled for appointment to the post of State Coordinator in Career Guidance and

Counselling.

iv) Issue a direction to the 4th respondent to extend the deputation of the applicant and allow him to continue as NSS Programme

Co-ordinator.

v) and grand such other and further reliefs as this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case including

costs.

The Tribunal disposed of the OA as per Ext.P1 verdict, the operative portion of which reads as follows:

In view of the facts stated above, the Original Application disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate

orders on Annexure A15 representation within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an

opportunity of personal hearing to the applicant. The first respondent, while considering Annexure A15, shall also consider the recommendations

by the third respondent as well as the State Police Chief. In order to enable the first respondent to pass appropriate orders, the applicant shall

forward a copy of this Original Application along with a certified copy of the order to the first respondent.

The challenge is raised by the first respondent in OA, who is the Manager of M.M. Oriental Vocational Higher Secondary School,

Panayappilly, pointing out that it is an aided school and that no jurisdiction is vested with the Kerala Administrative Tribunal to have entertained the

matter. It is also pointed out that the first respondent was permitted to go on deputation and on expiry of deputation, the petitioner, being the

appointing authority, required the first respondent to join duty, which has not been complied with so far.

When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on the last occasion, the learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that the

first respondent, though wanted to join duty, was not permitted by the petitioner. It was also added that the claim for retention was put forth by the

first respondent, based on valid grounds. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was absolutely no instance of any malafides

and the petitioner was always ready and willing to accept the first respondent, adding that the stand taken by the petitioner in not extending the

deputation is only to see that the students are not be affected, in any manner. It was also stated that, if the first respondent was ready to come and

join the petitioner''s institution forthwith, no further steps will be taken by way of disciplinary action. The learned counsel for the first respondent

sought for time to get instructions.

Today, the learned counsel for the first respondent submits, on instructions, that the first respondent is ready and willing to join duty in the

petitioner''s institution without prejudice to pursue his grievance by way of other appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

In the above circumstances, the first respondent is permitted to join duty in the petitioner''s institution within one week. The period during which the

first respondent was out of duty, could be taken up before the competent authority for regularisation in appropriate manner and in accordance with

law. This court makes it clear that no merit adjudication has been done in this case and all issues including the maintainability of the proceedings

before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal are left open. Ext.P1 stands modified to the above extent.