IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 33153 of 2006(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ C.A.AJITH, S/O.ANNALAKUTTY, AGED 23 YEARS, H.S.A.(MATHS), A.M.H.S.VENGOOR, P.O.VENGOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SRI.LATHA PRABHAKARAN SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN RESPONDENT: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 33153/2006/V APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1: COPY OF THE ORDER NO-GO(RT)2464/06/G.EDN. ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 17-6-2006. EXT. P2: COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION BY THE PETITIONER DATED 6-7-2006 TO THE RESPONDENT. EXT. P3: COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTED OF THE PETITIONER SUBMITTED TO THE RESPONDENT. EXT. P4: COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(RT) NO.4949/06/GL.ED DATED 15-11-2006 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT. P5: COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO-1907/06/G.EDN. DATED 10-5-2006 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT. P6: COPY OF THE GO (RT) NO.3104/05/GL.EDN DATED 21.6.2006 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT. P7: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.10.2007 IN W.P.(C) NO.31819/2007 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE JP S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ======================= W.P.(C) No. 33153 of 2006(V) ======================= Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner was appointed as a HSA in Mathematics in the AMHS, Vengoor. On 16.6.2004, by Exts.P1 and P4, the educational authority and Government refused approval for the same on the ground that there was one protected teacher available in Malappuram District and as per the Government Orders, the school being a newly upgraded school, no appointments could have been made without appointing one protected teacher. The petitioner now contends that by Ext.P5 order, the Government itself had approved similar appointments prior to and subsequent to the appointment of the petitioner, on condition that the manager appoints a protected teacher in the next arising vacancy. Petitioner also points out that by GO(P) No.46/06/Gen. Edn. dated 1.2.2006, Government itself had approved the appointment of 402 similarly appointed teachers in various districts on condition that the manager appoints a W.P.(C) No. 33153/2006/V -2- protected teacher in the next arising vacancy. In the affidavit filed along with the IA No.4704/ 2008 in this writ petition, the petitioner has further stated as follows: "As per G.O.(P) No.46/06/G.Edn. dated 1.2.2006 the Government has given direction to approve the appointment of 402 teachers and non-teaching staff appointed upto 31.12.04 under similar circumstances. The only reason for not approving my appointment as per Ext.P1 was that there is a protected teacher in this category. The said protected teacher viz., Smt.K.L.Sheeba,. HSA (Mathematics) from High School, Vannery was absorbed to M.E.S Higher Secondary School, Irumbiliyam in an established vacancy with effect from 1.12.2006. There is no protected hand in the category of HSA (Mathematics) in Malappuram District from 1.12.2006 onwards. In confirmity with the Government Order dated 1.2.2006 mentioned above, the Manager appointed Smt.K.N.Sreelatha a protected teacher in the school as per direction issued by the District Educational Officer, Wandoor as per Letter No.A4.560/08 dated 12.2.2008." 2. In the above circumstances, the petitioner submits that in view of the fact that a protected teacher has been appointed by the manager, the petitioner's appointment may be directed to be approved. 3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. The learned Government Pleader with the help of the counter affidavit justifies the non-approval of the petitioner's appointment. W.P.(C) No. 33153/2006/V -3- 4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. I am of the view that in view of Ext.P5 Government Order, and the G.O.(P) N0.46/06 referred to above as also the subsequent developments by the manager appointing a protected teacher in the school, the question of approval of the petitioner has to be re-considered by the respondent again. I am of the opinion that even if the petitioner's appointment cannot be approved with effect from the original date, in view of the fact that the Government itself had subsequently permitted similar approvals on condition that in the future vacancy a protected teacher is appointed, now that the manager has appointed a protected teacher on 12.2.2008, there cannot be any objection in not approving the petitioner's appointment at least from the date of absorption of the protected teacher in the other private schools namely, 1.12.2006. Accordingly, I direct the respondent to consider the eligibility of the petitioner for approval with effect from 1.12.2006 in the light of the observation made above. This shall be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, untrammelled by the earlier orders passed by the Government in this case. W.P.(C) No. 33153/2006/V -4- The writ petition is disposed of as above. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE jp