IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2008 / 28TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23411 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. CARMEL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OF CMI SCHOOLS CARMEL PROVINCIAL HOUSE, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 661 REPRESENTED BY THE CORPORATE MANAGER. 2. FR.BOBY JACOB, H S A (SS), INFANT JESUS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VAZHAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN,J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.23411 of 2008 K -------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T The first petitioner is a private Educational Agency. The second petitioner is working as High School Assistant (Social Science) in Infant Jesus Higher Secondary School, Vazhakulam, under the first petitioner Educational Agency. 2. The second petitioner was appointed as the High School Assistant (Social Science) on 5.6.2006. The appointment was approved by the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha. It is stated that the probation of the second petitioner was declared. Second petitioner was drawing regular salary. It would appear that there was an audit objection that the second petitioner was not a qualified person to be appointed as High School Assistant (Social Science). As per Ext.P9 judgment dated 6.6.2008 in W.P.(C) No.16857 of 2008 the Director of Public Instruction was directed to consider the objections and to decide whether the second petitioner is entitled to continue in service. In compliance with Ext.P9 judgment, the Director of Public Instruction passed Ext.P10 order dated 7.7.2008, holding that the appointment of second petitioner as High School Assistant (Social Science) was irregular as he does not have the requisite qualification to be appointed as High School Assistant (Social Science) WP(C) No.23411/2008 2 3. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:- “i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order calling for the records leading to Ext.P8 and P10; quash and set aside Ext.P8 & Ext.P10; ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing respondents to disburse the salary due to the 2nd petitioner, forthwith. iii) declare that the 2nd petitioner is duly qualified to hold the post of HSA (SS) and is entitled to continue as such in the 1st petitioner's school; iv) declare that Ext.P4 and P5 are ultra vires and void to the extent it curtails or abrogates the prospects of the 2nd petitioner in continuing as HSA (SS). v) grant such other relief as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” WP(C) No.23411/2008 3 The learned Government Pleader submitted that as against Ext.P10 order the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of filing revision before the Government under Rule 92 of of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules. Therefore, it is not proper to entertain this Writ Petition at this stage. Leaving open the remedy of the petitioner to file a revision challenging Ext.P10 order, the Writ Petition is disposed of. It is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. If the petitioner files a revision before the Government, it goes without saying that he will be entitled to file appropriate application for interim relief as well. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. cks