IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2009 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10706 of 2009(G) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- JOSSY A, W/O. FELIX K, AGED 39 YEARS,RESIDING AT PAPPALI HOUSE, ADIMALATHURA, CHOWARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. MR.AYYAPPAN SANKAR MR.G.SURARSHAN MR.S.VINODKUMAR MR.AMJITH.G.K. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATION OFFICE, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE MANAGER, ST. JOSEPH'S L.P.S., CHOWARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. JEEN, L.P.S.A., ST. JOSEPH'S L.P.S., CHOWARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P(C) No. 10706 of 2009-G ------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of April, 2009. J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.Ayyappan Sankar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.A.J.Varghese, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to or hear the respondents 4 and 5. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Lower Primary School Assistant (LPSA for short) in a leave vacancy during the period from 9.6.2003 to 16.2.2004. The Assistant Educational Officer, Balaramapuram, declined to approve the appointment mainly for the reason that the appointment of Smt.Binitha I.C has not been approved. The Manager submitted a revision petition before the Director of Public Instruction. By Ext.P6 order passed on 13.12.2006 the revision petition was dismissed. The petitioner has now moved the Director of Public Instruction in Ext.P7 revision pointing out that the appointment of the fifth respondent who was appointed later is going to be approved and that if the fifth respondent's appointment is approved it will seriously prejudice her W.P(C) No. 10706 of 2009-G 2 rights. In this writ petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks a direction to the Director of Public Instruction to consider Ext.P7 revision petition and pass orders thereon. The Manager had invoked the revisional jurisdiction of the Director of Public Instruction challenging Ext.P5. Rule 8A of Chapter XIV A of the KER does not empower the Director of Public Instruction to repeatedly exercise the power of revision in relation to the same subject matter. Therefore the Director of Public Instruction cannot entertain Ext.P7. The remedy of the petitioner if he is aggrieved by Exts.P5 and P6 is to move the Government under Rule 92 of Chapter XIV A of the KER. Accordingly I dispose of this writ petition with the observation that if the petitioner moves the Government under Rule 92 of Chapter XIV A of the KER within one month from today, the Government shall entertain the said revision petition and pass orders thereon after affording the petitioner, the fourth respondent Manager and the fifth respondent teacher an opportunity of being heard. Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE //True Copy// ab PA to Judge