IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 18468 of 2006(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- NICY BABY.T, L.P.S.A., NATIONAL L.P.S., MANALY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUNNAMKULAM. 5. THE MANAGER, NATIONAL L.P.S., MANALY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. RAVIKRISHNAN, R5 BY ADV. SRI.PRAMJI PAUL VAZHAPPILLY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.18468/2006-W: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DTD. 05/06/2002 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE R.5. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 12/12/2003 OF THE R.4. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 21/02/2004 OF THE R.1. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 28/06/2004 OF THE R.3. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 20/01/2005 OF THE R.4. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 12/05/2004 OF THE R..2 EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 02/05/2005 OF THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 17/08/2005OF THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER DTD. 14/07/2003 FOR THE YEAR 200304 OF THE R.4. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER DTD. 20/09/2004 FOR THE YEAR 2004- 05 OF THE R.4. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER DTD. 17/10/2005 FOR THE YEAR 2005- 06 OF THE R.4. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 21/05/1998 OF THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 21/12/2004 OF THE GOVERNMENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R5.A: COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER NO. D. DIS/E-1970/2002 FOR THE YEAR 2002-2003 DTD. 03/07/2002 ISSUED BY THE R.4. EXT.R5.B: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO. G.O.(P).NO.169/04/G. EDN. DTD. 15/06/2004. EXT.R5.C: COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER NO. D. DIS/E/2454/07 FOR THE YEAR 2007-2008 DTD. 06/11/2007 ISSUED BY THE R.4. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.18468/2006 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT The prayer in this writ petition are to quash Exts.P5 and P6 to the extent it refuses one division and post in NLPS, Manaly, Trissur for the year 2002-03. Petitioner also seeks a direction to quash Exts.P9, P10 and P11 staff fixation orders for the subsequent years. 2. Petitioner was appointed as LPSA against a promotion vacancy by Ext.P1 order dated 5.6.2002. Approval was rejected by Ext.P2 order of the 4th respondent and the reasons stated was that the appointment was against the promotion vacancy and therefore, could not be approved. By Ext.P3 order dated 21.1.2004 the Government clarified that appointments made after 29.10.2001 by promotion from the existing teachers and appointment made against the resultant vacancy can be approved. WP(c).No.18468/06 2 3. The petitioner challenged Ext.P2 order before the Deputy Director by filing an appeal and that was allowed by Ext.P4 order and the matter was remanded to the Assistant Education Officer for fresh disposal. The matter accordingly reconsidered and the AEO by Ext.P5 order again rejected approval on the ground that, there is a division fall consequent on the Super Check Cell report, Ext.P6, which also shows that the subject matter of the report is with reference to the academic year 2003-04. It is consequent to Ext.P6 that by Ext.P5 approval was again rejected. In so far as Ext.P9, P10 and P11 staff fixation orders for the years 2003 to 2006 are concerned those are issued following Ext.P6 report of the Super Check Cell. 4. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that by Ext.P5 approval has been rejected based on the facts as available for the academic year 2003-04 and that by Ext.P4 order when the appeal filed by her was allowed her entitlement for approval should have been considered with reference to the academic year 2002-03. In find force in the submission made. WP(c).No.18468/06 3 5. As already stated, the appointment of the petitioner was in the academic year 2002-03. Rejection of approval by Ext.P2 was on the ground that the vacancy was a promotion vacancy and therefore could not be approved. It was against this order appeal was filed and that was allowed by Ext.P4 order and the matter was remitted to the AEO. Therefore her entitlement for approval should have been decided with reference to the situation in the school during the academic year 2002-03. For that reason I am inclined to set aside Ext.P5 and direct that the 4th respondent shall reconsider the matter as directed in Ext.P4 with reference to the posts sanctioned during the academic year 2002-03. Once that exercise is completed, if necessary, orders in regard to the subsequent years applying relevant ratio shall be passed. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 8 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. WP(c).No.18468/06 4