IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2009 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1930 WA.No. 303 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.17098/2007 Dated 18/12/2008 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ------------------------ JASMINE MARY CHACKO, KARAMPENTATHU HOUSE, NARANAMMUZHI P.O., RANNI-PERUNADU, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.JACOB P.ALEX RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. MANAGER, (CATHOLICATE & M.D.SCHOOL CORPORATE MANAGEMENT), DEVALOKAM, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW R1 & R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 303 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------- Dated 4th March, 2009. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The writ petitioner is the appellant. She was appointed as Higher Secondary School Teacher (Computer Application) by the 3rd respondent Manager in St.Behanan's Higher Secondary School, Vennikulam. She is taking classes in Computer Application for the Plus Two course (known as Commerce Batch). Originally, one of the subjects of the said course was Mathematics. The Manager changed that subject as Computer Application and to teach the said subject, the appellant was appointed. The change of subject for the aforementioned Commerce Batch was sanctioned by the Government by Ext.P5 order dated 25.5.2004, subject to the stipulation that there shall not be any additional financial commitment to the Government, as a result of the said change. The effect of that order was that the appellant's appointment was not approved. If it is approved, evidently, there will be additional financial commitment to the State. Her claim in this WA 303/2009 2 regard was rejected by Ext.P7 order, by the Director of Higher Secondary Education. Thereafter, as per the direction of this Court, the Government considered the said claim of the appellant and rejected it by Ext.P8 order dated 16.3.2007. Challenging those orders, the Writ Petition was filed. The learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition. This Writ Appeal is filed, seeking reversal of the judgment of the learned Single Judge. 2. But, as long as Ext.P5 remains in force, the appellant cannot succeed. Realising the said fact, the learned senior counsel for the appellant prayed for withdrawal of the Writ Appeal without prejudice to the right of the appellant to move the Government for modification of the condition in Ext.P5, which stands in her way. The appellant has also produced Annexures II and III, the representations filed by her Manager before the Government, seeking modification of the aforementioned condition. She prays, she/her Manager may be given liberty to pursue those representations. 3. We heard the learned Government Pleader on the above point. The Writ Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the rights, if any, of the appellant or her Manager to pursue the aforementioned WA 303/2009 3 representations, if they are received and pending before the Government. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. nm/