TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 1308
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dered a common judgment in all the four writ petitions: The claim of the two teachers to be the LPSAs was upheld. The aggrieved two filed writ appeals. They have, however, chosen to file appeals in their own writ petitions, but not in those filed by the other teachers. It was despite the fact that they were parties to the other writ petitions and the findings in them were to their prejudice. Apart from the merits, a preliminary question, now, begs for an answer-Are these two writ appeals barred by the principles of res judicata? 3. As we resolve to determine the preliminary issue first and to consider the merits of the matter-if the lis could survive the preliminary objection-thereafter, we touch upon the factual controversy only to the extent necessary. 4. There are four protagonists to this litigation, one of them joined by the Manager of the School: (1) E. P.Sajithkumar, (2) Nisha M.Nair (both having a common cause); (3) K. Rajitha, and (4) E.V.Latha. We will take the pleadings of E.P.Sajithkumar in W.P. (C) No. 8287 of 2012 as the basis for our discussion. Facts in Brief as Pleaded by E.P. Sajithkumar: 5. In Ackiparamba UP School, during the academic year 2002-03, the sanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was appointed in a regular vacancy against the retirement vacancy of an Assistant Teacher, who was holding the charge of UP Section (Std. VIC) as UPSA at the time of her retirement. Latha's appointment was approved as an LPSA with effect from 01.06.2005 and Nisha, a B.Ed., holder, was appointed in the school as a UPSA with effect from 21.06.2002 regularly. Given the subsequent division fall, Nisha was retrenched from service with effect from 15.07.2008. 10. During 2009-10, one post of UPSA and one post of LPSA were reduced for insufficient student strength. As Sajithkumar was a UPSA, the benefit of revised students-teacher ratio was extended to him, and Rajitha, an LPSA, was retrenched. Later, in the academic year 2010-11, one UPSA and two LPSA posts were reduced owing to the shortage of student strength. Sajithkumar could get the benefit of 1:40 ratio for that year, too, as a UPSA. 11. There was no vacancy in LP section when Sajithmumar was appointed in 2002; so his appointment was as a UPSA. He has a degree with B.Ed., and is qualified to be appointed only as a UPSA. Since there was a chance of reduction of the UPSA post, Sajithkumar pleaded before the DDE and DPI to reckon hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The twin reliefs they sought were as follows: * Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st to 4th and 7th respondents to implement Exhibits P4 to P7 orders; * to command the 4th and 7th respondents to disburse the salary due to Nisha M. Nair. (4) W.P. (C) No.8287 of 2012: E. P.Sajithkumar is the petitioner; E.V.Latha and Nisha M.Nair are the 5th and 6th respondents respectively. Among other things, Sajithkumar has sought these reliefs: * to declare that he was appointed as an LPSA with effect from 05-06-2002 and permit him to continue as an LPSA; * to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to implement Exhibit P9 Government Order. The Findings in the Impugned Common Judgment: 14. After an elaborate consideration, the learned Single Judge, after examining the summoned original records, acknowledges that there had been interpolations in Sajithkumar's service record-but the interpolation was said to be to his advantage. The observation (in para 14) is to the effect that Sajithkumar's claim, as noticed, is based on the DDE's enquiry report. Admittedly, Sajithkumar holds a B.Ed., while Latha holds a TTC. Though earlier both TTC and B.Ed. holders could be a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icata is a common law principle of preclusion, devised to deter endless cycles of litigation; it is animated by a public policy against repetitious recourse to judicial remedies. Also of not less importance is the economy of judicial time, which can be spent on worthier causes. Three maxims can be cited as forming the foundation for this rule aimed at efficiency and finality: (a) Nemo debet lis vaxari pro eadem causa (no man should be vexed twice for the same cause); (b) Interest republicae ut sit finis litium (it is in the interest of the state that there should be an end to a litigation); and (c) Re judicata pro veritate occipitur (a judicial decision must be accepted as correct). 21. The four elements of res judicata-a black letter law- are as follows: (a) the parties are identical or in privity; (b) the judgment in the prior action was rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction; (c) the prior action was concluded by a final judgment on the merits; and (4) the same claim or cause of action was involved in both actions. 22. Though Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure consecrates this common law principle as a statutory mandate, it incontrovertibly applies to public law ....