IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 WA.No. 2672 of 2005() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.25021/2004 Dated 26/07/2005 .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.NOBLE MATHEW RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: --------------- N.K.SADANANDAN, RESIDING AT RAMARNIKETHAN, MUNDUMETTA, P.O.PATHIRIYADU, MANAGER, KUNHIRIKKA U.P. SCHOOL, P.O.PATHIRIYADU, THALASSERI TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. ADDL.R2: K.C.PRAKASHAN, S/O.MALPPILAYI KORAN, AGED 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI HOUSE, POST PATHIRIYAD, KANNUR DISTRICT. (ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.7.6.2006 IN I.A.NO.672/2006) ADV. SRI.C.VALSALAN FOR R1 SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN FOR R1 SMT.THUSHARA.V FOR R1 SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. FOR ADDL.R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 2672 OF 2005-C ----------------------------------------- Dated 14th January, 2009. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The respondents in the writ petition are the appellants. The writ petitioner is the 1st respondent, who is the Manager of a U.P. School. There were two Full-Time posts of Sanskrit Teacher and Urdu Teacher in his school. The Sanskrit Teacher died on 9.12.2001. In that vacancy the Manager appointed the 2nd respondent as Full-Time Sanskrit Teacher on 20.6.2002. But, the said appointment was not approved for the reason that only a Part-Time post was available in Sanskrit. 2. As per the staff fixation order for the year 2002-03 only a Part- Time post of Sanskrit Teacher was sanctioned. Aggrieved by that order, the Manager appealed before the Deputy Director of Education. That appeal was dismissed by Ext.P5 order dated 19.10.2002. Against the next year's staff fixation order, in which also the post of Sanskrit Teacher was treated as Part-Time, the Manager appealed. That appeal was rejected by Ext.P6 WA 2672/2005 2 order dated 14.11.2003. Against Ext.P5 order, the Manager moved the Director of Public Instruction, by filing Ext.P7 appeal. That appeal was rejected by the D.P.I, by Ext.P8 order dated 25.4.2003. Against that order, the Manager moved the Government in revision. That was dismissed by the Government by Ext.P10 communication dated 26.5.2004. The writ petition was filed challenging Exts.P5, P6, P8 and P10. 3. The impugned orders were passed, mainly relying on two grounds. (1) Higher level verification was not done. (2) There was a ban for creation of new posts. The writ petitioner contended that for conversion of a Part- Time post into a Full-Time post by diversion, higher level verification is not necessary. He also contended that economy measure will not affect appointments in retirement vacancies. The learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition. Hence this appeal by the official respondents. 4. We heard the learned counsel on both sides. Going by the facts of the case, it is not clear whether the ban imposed by the Government under Rule 14 of Chapter XXIII of the K.E.R will affect conversion of Part-Time posts into Full-Time posts by diversion of periods covered by Group C subjects. There are not sufficient materials before us to decide this point. But, we agree with the contention of the writ petitioner/1st respondent that for conversion by diversion, higher level verification is not necessary. In WA 2672/2005 3 view of the above position, we think that the matter should be sent to the Government for reconsideration whether the orders banning creation of new posts will affect conversion of posts by diverting periods covered by Group- C subjects. The Government shall take a decision on the above point within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To enable the Government to do that, we set aside Ext.P10 as also the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The respondents herein shall be heard before final orders are passed as directed above. Needless to say, if the decision on the above point is in favour of the 1st respondent, the appointment of Sanskrit Teacher made by him on 20.6.2002 shall be approved as Full- Time. The Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE. Nm/