IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 22ND MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 118 of 2009() --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.28223/2007 Dated 20/11/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER --------------------------------------------------------- K.SADATH, MYLISSERY, CHERIYA KUMBALAM, PALERI P.O., KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. (FORMERLY ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.L.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI). BY ADVOCATE MR.A.V.M.SALAHUDDEEN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUNNUMMAL, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, M.L.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. P.JAMEELA, ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.L.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 5. PREMANAND, ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.L.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 6. SAREENA K.K., ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.L.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 7. SHYAMA, ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.L.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 8. SHEEJA, ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.L.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 9. DUNA, ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.L.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 10. BEENA, ASSISTANT TEACHER, M.L.U.P.SCHOOL, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- R.P.No.118 of 2009 --------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of February, 2009 ORDER The writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 20/11/2008, upholding the claim of the writ petitioner for the appointment under Rule 51-A of Chapter XIV-A KER. In the judgment, it was held that the claim of the petitioner will be only against the vacancies which arose after 11/07/2007, when Exhibit P6 order, recognising his claim, was passed. It is now pointed out that vacancies had arisen after 11/07/2007 and that it was reported to this Court by filing I.A No.7675 of 2008. Petitioner submits that he should have been appointed against third vacancy. The Manger does not dispute the correctness of the statement that vacancies did arise. But however he only points out that a person has already been appointed to that vacancy. 2. Having regard to the fact that by Exhibit P6, petitioner's claim under Rule 51-A has been recognised, the petitioner is entitled to be accommodated to a vacancy after that date. It is the duty of the R.P.No.118 / 2009 2 Manger to take steps for accommodating the petitioner in vacancies that arose after 11/7/2007 and therefore, the Manger shall do the needful in the matter in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of production of copy of this order. Review Petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm