IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2011 / 10TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 1037 of 2007(W) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SRI. M.K.RAMESAN, U.P.S.A. (NOW WORKING AS H.S.A.), A.K.K.R.H.S. FOR BOYS, CHELANNUR, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN K.GEORGE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, KOZHIKODE. 4. THE MANAGER, A K K R H S FOR BOYS, CHELANNUR, KOZHIKODE. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.1037/2007-W: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 06/09/2003 ISSUED BY THE R.3. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 10/12/2005 BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 27/05/2006 BY THE R.1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 1037 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 1st day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was appointed as a UPSA in an aided school by the 4th respondent-manager in an anticipated additional vacancy on 15.6.1990. The 3rd respondent sanctioned the post but approved the service of the petitioner only with effect from the date of the order. On appeal by the 4th respondent- manager before the 2nd and 1st respondents, it was finally approved with effect from 16.7.1990. The manager filed a representation before the Government, which was rejected by Ext. P3 holding that the petitioner is entitled to have his appointment approved only with effect from 16.7.1990 in view of Rule 12B of Chapter XXIII of KER. The petitioner is challenging the same, seeking the following reliefs: “i. Issue a writ of certiorari quashing that part of Ext. P1 wherein the petitioner's service was approved from 16.7.1990, instead of 15.6.1990. ii. issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext. P3 order. iii. Issue a declaration to the effect that the petitioner's approved service under the 4th respondent really commenced with effect from 15.6.1990, the date of his first appointment.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. Ext. P3 order reads thus: “I am to invite your attention to the letter cited and to inform you that the Government in appeal has sanctioned the additional W.P(C) No. 1037 of 2007 -: 2 :- posts with effect from 16.7.90 as per GO (Rt) 34/93/GE dated 1.1.93. As per Rule 12 B Chapter XXIII Kerala Education Rule, in cases where appellate authority sanctions additional posts which are to be filled up by appointing fresh hands, such posts will have effect from 1st September or the date of appellate order whichever is earlier. Since your appointment has been approved with effect from 16.7.90, no further benefit is allowable to you as per rules in force. Hence your request for approval of appointment contained in the representation is hereby rejected.” From the same, I understand that the additional post was sanctioned by the Government in an appeal. This is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. If that be so, Rule 12D(3) of Chapter XXIII of KER is applicable to the same. (The provision of the Rule is wrongly quoted as Rule 12B). Rule 12D(3) of KER reads thus: “12D. Appeal against staff fixation: xx xx xx (3) If the appellate authority restores the post disallowed by the Educational Officer against which qualified teachers had been working, such posts shall be deemed to have been sanctioned from the 15th July. In cases where the appellate authority allows the additional posts which are to be filled up by transfer of excess hands from other schools under the same Educational Agency, the additional posts shall be deemed to have been sanctioned from the 15th of July. In cases where appellate authority sanctions additional posts which are to be filled up by appointing fresh hands such posts will have effect from 1st September or the date of the appellate order, whichever is earlier. The Deputy Director (Education) may give effect to the appellate order with retrospective effect in deserving cases for reasons to be specified.” Insofar as an additional post was sanctioned in appeal, Rule 12D(3) squarely applies to the petitioner's W.P(C) No. 1037 of 2007 -: 3 :- case. In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in the contentions of the petitioner and accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/