IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2009 / 15TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22313 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- E.V.RAJI, W/O.K.S.JAYARAJAN, AGED 45 YEARS, KANIMANGALAM HOUSE, ELAVUMPARA PO, PALAKKAD DIST NOW WORKING AS UPSA, CVM HIGH SCHOOL, VANDAZHI. BY DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM,ADVOCATE RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD., 2. DEPUTY EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD,. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTR5UCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. C.S.CHITRA DEVI,UPSA, CVM HIGH SCHOOL VANDAZHI,PALAKKAD. 5. M.LATHA, UPSA, CVM HIGH SCHOOL VANDAZHI, PALAKKAD. 6. A.R.ANITHA, UPSA, CVM HIGH SCHOOL VANDAZHI, PALAKKAD. 7. SEEMA PAULSON,UPSA, CVM HIGH SCHOOL VANDAZHI, PALAKKAD. BY MR.A.J.VARGHESE, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: dvs T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.22313 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of August, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is working as U.P.S.A in the CVM High School, Vandazhi. Her continued service starts from 16.08.1993 in the said cadre. The respondents 4 to 7 are juniors to the petitioner in the cadre of UPSA/LPSA, which is evidenced by Exhibit P1 seniority list. Due to reduction of students in the academic year 2008-2009, some of the posts were reduced. Exhibit P2 is the copy of the staff fixation order. In Exhibit P2, it was held that there are eight UPSAs in excess and are entitled for protection in terms of the Government Orders in force. 2. The petitioner submits that contrary to the Government Orders, the petitioner was deployed to an un-economical school at PCA LPS, Kavassery. Exhibits P4 and P5 are the Government Orders, relied upon by the petitioner, regarding deployment of the protected teachers. W.P.(C) No.22313/2009 2 3. The case of the petitioner is that the deployment can be only on the basis of seniority. The petitioner was deployed by the Deputy Director of Education to a nearby school as per Exhibit P5(a). But, the Management was reluctant to admit the petitioner to the said school, which is clear from Exhibit P6. Accordingly, the petitioner rejoined back in the parent school and is continuing there. This was reported by the Headmaster as per Exhibit P7 to the Deputy Director of Education. It appears that the Deputy Director of Education has cautioned the Manager of the said school against the said action describing it as unwarranted as per Exhibit P8. These averments have been made by the petitioner in the writ petition. 4. Challenging Exhibit P5(a), the petitioner has filed Exhibit P9 before the Director of Public Instruction. It is pointed out that no orders have been passed by the Director of Public Instruction on Exhibit P9. Therefore, the petitioner apprehends that she may be deployed to PCA L.P School at Kavassery by the Deputy Director of Education in spite of the pendency of Exhibit P9. W.P.(C) No.22313/2009 3 In the light of the above position, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P9, after hearing the petitioner and other affected parties including respondents 4 to 7 and the Manager, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Meanwhile, the petitioner will be retained in the parent school and further action will depend upon the order to be passed on Exhibit P9. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp