IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 27TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4858 of 2011(F) ------------------------------------ PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. T.K.M. BAVA MUSALIYAR, S/O. BEERAN KUTTY MUSALIYAR, AGED 75 YEARS, MANAGER, VELIMUKKU JAMA-ATH PALLI A.M.U.P SCHOOL, VELIMUKKU SOUTH, MALAPPURAM - 676 317. 2. T. SYAM SUNDER, FULL TIME SANSKRIT TEACHER, VELIMUKKU JAMA-ATH PALLI A.M.U.P SCHOOL, VELIMUKKU SOUTH, MALAPPURAM - 676 317. BY ADVS. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED, SRI.K.E.HAMZA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, DOWN HILL, POST MALAPPURAM - 676 519. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 101. 5. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 303. R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. NISHA BOSE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.4858 of 2011-F - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of February, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioners are respectively the Manager of a school and a full time Sanskrit teacher working therein. The issue pertains to the non approval of the appointment of the second petitioner as a full time Sanskrit teacher and the non sanctioning of the post in the staff fixation orders. The bare facts for the disposal of the writ petition are the following: 2. A part time post of Sanskrit teacher was sanctioned in the school in the year 1977-1978 as per Ext.P1 which was made as full time by Group C diversion in the year 1979-1980. It is stated that the same situation continued in 1980-1981 as evident from Ext.P3 staff fixation order and one Smt. Sreedevi was the full time Sanskrit teacher who retired on 30.4.2007. By Ext.P4 staff fixation order for the year 2007-2008 the post of Sanskrit teacher was reduced. In 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 even part-time post was not sanctioned citing the ban order issued by the Government and orders have been produced as Exts.P5 to P7. 3. The second petitioner was appointed by the first petitioner in the retirement vacancy of Smt. Sreedevi, as per Ext.P8 order, from 4.6.2007 wpc 4858/2011 2 onwards. The approval of the same was declined by the Asst. Educational Officer as per Ext.P9 and the appeal filed before the District Educational Officer was also rejected as per Ext.P11. The first petitioner moved the Deputy Director of Education to sanction a full time post of Junior Sanskrit teacher in 2007-2008 and 2008-2009, but the same were rejected as per Exts.P12 and P13 orders. 4. Thereafter, the first petitioner moved the Director of Public Instruction to sanction and approve the appointment of the second petitioner as per Ext.P14 appeal, which was rejected by Ext.P15. Ext.P16 is the request made by the first petitioner before the Government to sanction the post and grant approval to the appointment of the second petitioner. But in the meanwhile, the Director of Public Instruction rejected the request to sanction the post for 2008-2009 citing the ban order dated 17.8.2005, as per Ext.P17 order, against which Ext.P18 revision is pending. Ext.P20 is the order by which the Government ordered to retain the full time post by Group C diversion. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the light of the factual position, there may be a direction to consider the revision petition on its merits. 5. There will be a direction tot he Government to consider and pass orders on Exts.P16 and P18 after hearing the petitioners,within a period of wpc 4858/2011 3 three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/