IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2010 / 30TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30919 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAMACHANDRAN.T., H.S.A.(SOCIAL SCIENCE) KUTHUPARAMBA AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, P.O.KUTHUPARAMBA, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE MANAGER, KUTHUPARAMBA AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, P.O.KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR, KANNUR DIST., PIN 670 643. 2. A.K.PRAMEELA, HEADMISTRESS, KUTHUPARAMBA AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, POST KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN 670 643. 3. ABDUL RAZAK, ARABIC TEACHER, KUTHUPARAMBA AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, POST KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR DIST., PIN 670 643. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 5. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR- 670 001. 6. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THALASSERRY-670101. BY G.P.SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON ON 22/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30919 of 2010(L) PETITIONER'S EXTS: P1:- COPY OF SENIORITY LIST P2:- COPY OF REPRESENTATION DTD.10.10.09 P3:- COPY OF COUNTER STATEMENT DTD.4.2.2010 P4:- COPY OF ORDER DTD.10.2.2010 P5:- COPY OF GO DTD.23.7.10 P6:- COPY OF REVISION PETITION DTD.30.8.2010 RESPONDENTS EXTS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.30919 OF 2010 ------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT The case of the petitioner is the following: The petitioner is working as H.S.A (Social Science) in Kuthuparamba aided High School, having regular service from 10.6.1980. It is stated that he worked as a protected teacher, in Government High School, Mathil from 21.2.1985 to 31.3.1985 and in Government High School, Kunhimangalam from 1.4.1985 to 8.9.1988. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 commenced regular service with effect from 15.7.1985 and 15.7.1987 respectively and thus both of them are juniors to the petitioner. In Ext.P1 seniority list, the petitioner was placed as serial No.3 and respondent Nos.2 and 3 were placed as serial Nos.4 and 5. Against Ext.P1 seniority list, the respondent No.2 filed a representation before the District Educational Officer, who issued Ext.P4 order dated 10.2.2010 allowing the representation made by the second respondent. As per Ext.P4, W.P.(C).No.30919 OF 2010 2 respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were placed as serial Nos.3 and 4 while, the petitioner was placed in the position of serial No.5. 2. According to the petitioner, as per GO (P) No.130/2010/G.Edn. dated 23.7.2010 (Ext.P5), sub- rule 1 of rule 37 of Chapter XIV A was amended adding a proviso to the effect that the period of service rendered in the parent school or in another school by a teacher, who is relieved under rule 52, shall be reckoned for seniority on his re- appointment to the parent school and that benefit is available to the petitioner. Pointing out these aspects, the petitioner submitted Ext.P6 Revision before the Government under Rule 92 of Chapter XIV A. Ext.P6 is pending. It is pointed out that based on Ext.P4 order passed by the District Educational Officer, the second respondent was promoted and appointed as Headmaster on 1.4.2010. 3. The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner in the Writ Petition are the following: W.P.(C).No.30919 OF 2010 3 “i) to issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P4 as unjust, illegal and unsustainable; ii) to issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P1 only to the extent to which it places the petitioner below respondents 2 and 3 and to the extent to which it does not place the petitioner above respondents 2 and 3; iii) to declare that the petitioner is entitled to get the seniority reassigned in the light of amendment brought to sub rule 1 of Rule 37 of Chapter XIVA KER, over respondents 2 and 3; iv) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1,4 and 5 to reassign the seniority of the petitioner by placing him above respondents 2 and 3 on the basis of Ext.P5 amendment; v) to declare that the petitioner is senior in service to respondents 2 and 3; vi) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 4th respondent to take a decision in Ext.P6 revision petition within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court; vii) to issue such other orders, directions or writs as may be prayed for and that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case”. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the time being, the petitioner would be satisfied, if Ext.P6 revision is directed to be disposed of expeditiously, leaving open the other contentions raised by the petitioner. W.P.(C).No.30919 OF 2010 4 In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: a) The 4th respondent shall consider and dispose of Ext.P6 revision, dated 30th August, 2010, filed by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, the Manager, respondent Nos.2 and 3, and any other affected party. b) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the 4th respondent. W.P.(C).No.30919 OF 2010 5 c) The petitioner shall send a copy of the Writ Petition and a copy of the judgment to respondents 1 to 3 by registered post and he shall produce proof of the same before the first respondent. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms