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. 22232 of 2009(Y) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- CINU P.ELIAS, PROBATIONARY H.S.A (ENGLISH), J.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VAKATHANAM UNDER THE CORPORATE MANAGERMENT OF CATHOLIC AND M.D.SCHOOLS, DEVALOKAM, KOTTAYAM, RESIDING AT MULLOTHUPUTHUPARAMBIL, VAZHOOR P.O., KAPPUKADU. BY MR.K.B.ARUNKUMAR, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. MANAGER, CATHOLICATE AND M.D.SCHOOLS, DEVALOKAM, KOTTAYAM. 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: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.22232 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of August, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was appointed as H.S.A. (English) from 04.06.2008 onwards (which is erroneously recorded as 14.06.2008 in Exhibit P2) in the transfer vacancy of Smt.Jenifer Mary George, H.S.A (English). Exhibit P1 is the copy of the order of appointment. By Exhibit P2, the District Educational Officer rejected the proposal for approval by placing reliance upon G.O.(P)No.104/2008/G.Edn dated 10.06.2008, which is produced as Exhibit P3. It is pointed out that in the light of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Unni Narayanan vs. State of Kerala (2009(2) KLT 604), the same cannot be supported. Exhibits P2 and P3 are challenged in this writ petition. 2. The validity of Exhibit P3 Government Order was under challenge in various writ petitions before this Court and a Division Bench of this Court in Unni Narayanan's case (supra) has held in paragraph 7 that the offending conditions in Exhibit P2 W.P.(C) No.22232/2009 2 Government Order cannot stand with the statutory rules. Therefore, for enforcing them, the relevant rules require amendment. As long as the rules are not amended, Exhibit P2 cannot be pressed into service by the Government. 3. Finally in paragraph 12, the following directions were issued: “In the case of the writ petitioners in these cases, orders, if any passed, approving their appointments on daily wage basis, relying on Ext.P2 Government Order are quashed. All appointments, whether pending approval or already rejected, shall be considered/reconsidered by the Educational Officers concerned and fresh orders shall be passed in the light of the declaration of law made by us in W.P.(C) No.25176 of 2008. The salary found due to be paid to the incumbents concerned shall be released immediately. The action in this regard shall be completed within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment”. In the light of the above, Exhibit P2 is quashed. There will be a direction to the District Educational Officer to pass fresh orders in the light of the directions issued by the Division Bench above which will govern this case also. Appropriate orders shall be W.P.(C) No.22232/2009 3 passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the judgment of the Division Bench referred to above before the District Educational Officer for compliance. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp