IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2008 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 8606 of 2008(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.JISHA, AGED 31 YEARS, WIFE OF RAMESAN, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (ENGLISH) CHAKKALAKKAL HIGH SCHOOL, MADAVOOR P.O., PADANILAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM - 14. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. THE MANAGER, CHAKKALAKKAL HIGH SCHOOL, MADAVOOR P.O., PADANILAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 5. SMT.K.SWAPNA, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MATHS) CHAKKALAKKAL HIGH SCHOOL, MADAVOOR P.O. PADANILAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.R.SABU FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C)No.8606/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 30-7-2003. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EM2/87901/04/DPI/D.DIS. OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 20-1-2005. EXT.P3. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C) NO.4578/2007-T DATED 9-2-2007. EXT.P4. TRUE COPY OF G.O.(RT)NO.3335/07/GE OF THE GOVERNMENT DATED 21-7-2007. EXT.P5. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.256/07 OF THE MANAGER DATED 21-11-2007. EXT.P6. TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 1988 (2) KLT 413 (FB) EXT.P7. TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2007 (1) KLT 766 EXT.P8. TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2001 (2) KLT 273. / TRUE COPY / P.S.TO JUDGE K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 8606 OF 2008 Y -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th June, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner was appointed as High School Assistant (English) in Chakkalakkal High School, Madavoor, which is an aided school, with effect from 30.7.2003. The District Educational Officer approved the appointment of the petitioner as per Ext.P1 order, dated 15.1.2005. It is stated that the fifth respondent was appointed as High School Assistant (Maths) for the period from 28.1.2000 to 31.12.2002 and from 1.1.2003 to 31.12.2007 against the leave vacancy of one T.Santhakumar. The Manager appointed the fifth respondent against the newly sanctioned post of High School Assistant (English). The District Educational Officer did not grant approval to that appointment. The order of the District Educational Officer was confirmed in appeal by the Deputy Director of Education, Kozhikode. On further appeal, the Director of Public Instructions also confirmed the order passed by the lower authorities, as per Ext.P2 order. The fifth respondent filed a Revision against Ext.p2 order before the first respondent. The first respondent allowed the Revision and passed Ext.P4 order approving the appointment of the fifth respondent with effect from 15.7.2003 in continuation of her approved service from 28.1.2000 to 14.7.2003. On the basis of Ext.P4 order, the Manager issued Ext.P5 order dated 21.11.2007. In Ext.P5 order, it is W.P.(C) NO. 8606 OF 2008 :: 2 :: stated that the fifth respondent has been shifted to 37 division post with effect from 15.7.2003 onwards in continuation of her approved service from 28.1.2002 to 14.7.2003 and the petitioner who has been working in the School with effect from 30.7.2003 has been shifted to the leave vacancy of T.Santhakumar, HAS (Maths) up to 31.12.2007. 2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is against Exts.P4 and P5 orders. The petitioner has also prayed for a declaration that Ext.P1 order of approval of appointment of the petitioner as High School Assistant (English) against the regular sanctioned post is legal and valid. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent. It is not disputed that the petitioner was not heard by the first respondent before passing Ext.P4 order. The effect of Ext.P4 order is that it would affect the service of the petitioner. Necessarily, the first respondent ought to have issued notice to the petitioner and out to have afforded an opportunity of being heard to her. Since Ext.P4 is violative of the principles of natural justice, I quash Ext.P4. Since Ext.P4 is quashed, necessarily Ext.P5 order also should be quashed. The first respondent shall hear the petitioner, the fifth respondent and the Manager and shall pass final orders taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the W.P.(C) NO. 8606 OF 2008 :: 3 :: case. Needless to say that the first respondent shall pass a speaking order. Final decision in the matter shall be taken within a period of two months from today. The Writ Petition is allowed as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/