IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 31559 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. B.S.BEENA, HEADMISTRESS, CHEMPAKASSERY HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, P.O.BHOOTHAKULAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. V.J.CHANDRACHOODAN NAIR, HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER, CHEMPAKASSERY HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, P.O.BHOOTHAKULAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 001. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 001. 5. THE JOINT MANAGERS, CHEMPAKASSERY HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL & CHEMPAKASSERY TTI, P.O.BHOOTHAKULAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 302. 6. SMT.A.LEELAMMA, CHEMPAKASSERY TTI, P.O.BHOOTHAKULAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 302. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.31559 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The first petitioner was promoted and appointed as Headmistress of the High School Wing of Chembakassery Higher Secondary School with effect from 1.4.2009 as per Exhibit P1 appointment order issued by the Joint Managers, against the retirement vacancy of one Sarojini Amma, Headmistress of the school, who retired on superannuation on 31.3.2009. The District Educational Officer, Kollam rejected the proposal for approval of appointment and promotion of the first petitioner, as per Exhibit P2 order dated 30.12.2009. The Manager filed Exhibit P3 appeal before the Deputy Director of Education challenging Exhibit P2 order. Exhibit P3 appeal is pending disposal. 2. When the sixth respondent A.Leelamma entered on leave without allowance for the period from 21.10.2009 to 31.3.2010, the Manager promoted the second petitioner as WPC No.31559/25010 2 Headmaster. On expiry of the leave vacancy, the second petitioner was accommodated as HSST (Junior). The proposal for approval of the appointment of the second petitioner as Headmaster for the period from 21.10.2009 to 31.3.2010 was not approved. As per Exhibit P4 letter dated 16.9.2010 issued by the District Educational Officer to the Director of Public Instruction, clarification was sought. The clarification was sought in the following circumstances. The appointment of A.Leelamma, as Headmistress, was not approved by the District Educational Officer. Another reason for rejection was that the proposal was belated. The Deputy Director of Education as per the order dated 31.12.2009 allowed the request of the Joint Managers for condonation of delay in submitting the proposal. However, in that order there was no direction to the District Educational Officer to approve the appointment of Leelamma. The clarification was sought as to whether the objections are still subsisting. 3. Pointing out that there is undue delay in approving the promotion and appointments of the petitioners, the petitioners submitted Exhibit P5 revision before the Government. In Exhibit WPC No.31559/25010 3 P5 revision, Exhibit P2 order and Exhibit P4 letter was also challenged. Exhibit P5 revision is pending disposal. 4. Though several reliefs are claimed in the Writ Petition, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it would be sufficient, for the time being, if Exhibit P5 is directed to be disposed of. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: The first respondent shall consider and dispose of Exhibit P5 revision dated 29.9.2010 filed by the petitioners, 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 petitioners, respondents 5 and 6 and any other affected party. The petitioners shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl