IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2008 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 18285 of 2008(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.K.JAYASREE , U.P.S.A, S.V.H.S.PONGALADY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.D.SREEKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,THE GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE HEAD MASTER, SVHS, PONGALADY - 689 502, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. *ADDL.R4. P. SOYA, W/O. LATE GOPAKUMAR, AGED 56, PONGALADY, THATTAYIL POST, PANDALAM. *ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO.4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 31/10/08 IN I.A. 13676/08. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. A.J. VARGHESE, ADDL. R4 BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/12/2008, ALONG WITH W.P.(C). NO. 36650/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.18285/2008-B: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 15/05/2008. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REPLY. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 30/05/2008. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPORTED JUDGMENT IN NALINI KUMARI VS. STATE OF KERALA. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 02/06/2008 PROMOTING THE PETITIONER AS H.S.A. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.18285 & 36650 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 17th day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner in WP(C) No.18285/2008 is the Teacher and the petitioner in WP(C) No.36650/2008 is the Manager of an aided school. 2. Their grievance is against the order passed by the DEO revising the staff fixation order for the year 2007-08. This order is Ext.P3 in WP(C) No.18285/2008 and Ext.P1 in the other case. Aggrieved by this order, the Manager has already filed revision before the DPI, and the revision has been produced as Ext.P2 in WP(C) No.36650/2008. 3. In the meanwhile, the teacher filed WP(C) No.18285/2008, contending that the order revising the staff fixation order has been passed without jurisdiction. In that writ petition, this Court passed an interim order staying further proceedings by order dated 25/06/2008. During pendency of the said order, notice of hearing in the revision filed by the Manager was issued by the DPI, and parties were also heard. WP(C) No.18285 & 36650 of 2008 -2- 4. Meanwhile, orders consequential to Ext.P1 were issued and that order was challenged by the Manager in WP(C) No. 29953/2008. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P7 judgment, directing that the proceedings will be kept in abeyance until the revision is disposed of. 5. The Manager has now filed WP(C) No.36650/2008 aggrieved by Ext.P8, a notice of enquiry issued by the 1st respondent. 6. While the grievance of the Teacher was regarding the revision of the order revising the staff fixation order, the present grievance of the Manager is pertaining to the notice of enquiry issued by the DEO, which also is a consequence of the order revising staff fixation order. In such circumstances, in order to give a quietus to the whole controversy what is required to be done is that the DPI should dispose of the revision, in respect of which the parties have already been heard. Therefore, I direct that the DPI shall pass orders on the revision filed by the Manager against the order revising the staff fixation order pertaining to the year 2007- 08. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. It is WP(C) No.18285 & 36650 of 2008 -3- clarified that the contentions raised by both parties shall be dealt with and that this Court has not dealt with the merits of the contentions raised by the parties. These writ petitions are disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg