IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 7TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 1229 of 2008(U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------------- 1. GENERAL MANAGER, CTC EDUCATIONAL ATGENCY, ST.JOSEPH'S VIDYABHAVAN, EDAPPALLY. 2. SR. MARY JAIN, CLERK, LFHS, KUMBALANGHI. 3. ANNIE V.T., FULL TIME MENIAL, ST. FRANCIS HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS, ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.BABU VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION), ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MOHAMMED FOR R1 TO 4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.1229/2008 U APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT SEEKING PERMISSION TO ADMIT BOYS THE UP SECTION IN CKC GHS PONNURUNNI, DTD. 26/02/2007. EXT.P1(A): COPY OF REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT SEEKING PERMISSION TO ADMIT BOYS THE UP SECTION IN LMCC HSG ERNAKULAM DTD. 21/02/2007. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTD BY THE DEO TO THE DPI DTD. 7/08/2007 IN RESPECT OF CKC GHS PONNURUNNI. EXT.P2(A): COPY OF REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE DEO TO THE DPI DTD. 7/08/2007 IN RESPECT OF LMCC HSG ERNAKULAM. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE G.O.NO.5397/2007/GEN.EDN. DTD. 26/11/07 ACCORDING SANCTION FOR ADMITTING BOYS IN CKC GHS PONNURUNNI. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE G.O.NO.5396/2007/GEN.EDN. DTD. 26/11/07 ACCORDING SANCTION FOR ADMITTING BOYS IN LMCC HSG ERNAKULAM. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE SANCTIONING ORDER DTD. 16/06/2004 ACCORDING PERMISSION TO ADMIT BOYS IN THE U.P. SECTION OF ST.MARY'S CONVENT GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P5(A): COPY OF THE SANCTIONING ORDER DTD. 2/06/2001 ACCORDING PERMISSION TO ADMIT BOYS IN THE U.P. SECTION OF L.F.G.H.S. ERNAKULAM. EXT.P5(B): COPY OF THE SANCTIONING ORDER DTD. 23/03/1991 ACCORDING PERMISSION TO ADMIT BOYS IN THE U.P.SECTION OF ST.ANNES G.H.S., KOTTAPPURAM. EXT.P5(C): COPY OF THE SANCTIONING ORDER DTD. 25/09/2003 ACCORDING PERMISSION TO ADMIT BOYS IN THE U.P.SECTION OF OLF GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL, KUMBALANGHI. Kss ..2/- ..2... WPC.NO.1229/2008 U EXT.P6: COPY OF THE FIXATION OF ESTABLISHMENT ORDER 2007-2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 31/07/2007 IN RESPECT OF CKC GHS, PONNURUNNI. EXT.P6(A): COPY OF THE FIXATION OF ESTABLISHMENT ORDER 2007-2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 30/07/2007 IN RESPECT OF LMCC HSG, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE APPEAL PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DTD. 3/10/2007. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD. 3/12/2007. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE CHART SHOWING THE SERVICE DETAILS OF THE PETITIONERS 2 & 3. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.1229/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT The controversy in this writ petition is centered around Exts.P3 and P4. 2. The facts of the case are that, the first petitioner is the Manager of CTC Educational Agency and the petitioners 2 and 3 are a Clerk and a Full Time Menial working in the school of the said educational agency. In so far as this writ petition is concerned, by Exts.P1 and P1(a), the first petitioner applied to the 3rd respondent through the DEO for permission to admit the boys in standards 5 to 7 in CKC GHS Ponnurunni and LMCC HS for Girls Ernakulam from the academic year 2007-08 onwards. While these applications were pending, it is seen that, by Ext.P6 and P6(a), staff fixations in so far as the aforesaid schools were finalized on WP(c).No.1229/08 2 31.7.2007. 3. Exts.P1 and P1(a) applications were recommended by the DEO as per Exts.P7 and P8. Ultimately, by Exts.P3 and P4 permission was granted to the Ist petitioner on condition that the staff fixation effected will not be reviewed and that the strength of the boys admitted will not be counted for staff fixation. There is yet another condition that it will not result in any additional finance commitment to the Government. On this basis, from 2007-08 the permission sought for was granted. Petitioners are mainly aggrieved by that part of Ext.P3 and P4, which directs that the strength of the boys will be excluded for the purpose of staff fixation. 4. Counsel makes reference to Ext.P5 series of orders passed in identical circumstances but however, without mentioning anything about excluding any part of the students' strength for staff fixation purposes. It is stated that an WP(c).No.1229/08 3 appeal and revision were also filed but however orders were not passed. According to the petitioners, the consequence of the exclusion of the boys strength is the retrenchment of two employees, who are the petitioners 2 and 3 herein. 5. Respondents have filed a counter affidavit in which they are contending that the Ist Petitioner had admitted boys in the schools referred to above without obtaining orders from the authorities and that it was therefore that a condition was imposed in Ext.P3 and P4 that the number of boys so admitted will be excluded for staff fixation purposes. 6. According to the learned Government Pleader, the School is a secondary school covered by Rule 2 Note (2) Chapter II KER and that the permission granted to the Ist petitioner by the impugned orders is as per Rule 12(2) of Chapter VI KER. WP(c).No.1229/08 4 7. Even if it is assumed that there is substance in the contention of the learned Government Pleader that because the boy students were admitted without obtaining orders their strength is liable to be excluded for the year 2007-08, I see no justification for excluding the boys strength for the succeeding years. In order to justify such exclusion nothing is forthcoming. There is absolutely no justification to exclude permanently the number of boys, who are admitted in the school pursuant to Exts.P3 and P4. If that be so, the Department is liable to reckon the strength of boys admitted in the school, except in the year 2007-08 Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondents shall reckon the strength of boys admitted in the school from the academic year 2008-09 onwards. (ANTONY DOMINIC) vi JUDGE WP(c).No.1229/08 5 vi/ ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. WP(c).No.1229/08 6