IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2010 / 17TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17909 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MANAGER, SABARI CHARITABLE TRUST SCHOOLS/MANAGER, VLNM U.P.SCHOOL, VILAYANCHATHANNUR, PALAKKAD. 2. P.DIVYA, UPSA, VLNM U.P.SCHOOL, VILAYANCHATHANNUR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVT., GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONERS EXTS: EXT.P1:- COPY OF ORDER NO.C/2352-2008 DTD.6.1.2007 ISSUED BY R4 EXT.P2:- COPY OF ORDER NO.K.DIS.B6/1196 DTD.19.6.2007 ISSUED BY R3. EXT.P3:- COPY OF ORDER NO.G1/57601/02/DPI K.DIS.DTD.3.10.2007 ISSUED BY R2. EXT.P4:- COPY OF REVISION SUBMITTED BY P1 BEFORE R1 ON 16.7.2007 EXT.P5:- COPY OF ORDER NO.D.DIS.C/1683/06 DTD.13.11.06 ISSUED BY THE DIST/AEO. EXT.P6:- COPY OF LETTER NO.62117-B2/06/GE. DTD.1.3.07 ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT. EXT.P7:- COPY OF GO(Rt) NO.1520/08/G.EDN.DTD.27.3.2008 ISSUED BY R1. EXT.P8:- COPY OF GO(P) NO.317/05/G.EDN. DTD.17.8.2005 ISSUD BY R1. EXT.P9:- COPY OF STAFF STATEMENT AS ON 5.6.06 OF VLNM UPS, VILAYANCHATHANNUR. EXT.P10:- COPY OF GO(P) NO.10/10/G.EDN. DTD.12.1.2010 ISSUED BY R1. RESPONDENTS EXTS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C). NO.17909 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The first petitioner, the Manager, Sabari Charitable Trust Schools, appointed the second petitioner as UPSA on 26/8/2006. The second petitioner is a B.Ed. Degree holder. She has not passed T.T.C. Approval of appointment of the second petitioner was declined by the Assistant Educational Officer, District Educational officer and the Director of Public Instructions as per Exhibits P1, P2 and P3 orders. The matter was taken up in revision before the Government by the Manager. The Government passed Exhibit P7 order dated 27/3/2008, which is under challenge in this Writ petition. 2. The approval of appointment of the second petitioner was rejected on two grounds; 1.There was a ban for appointment as per G.O.(P)No.317/05/G.Edn. dated 17/8/2005. W.P.(C) NO.17909 OF 2008 :: 2 :: 2. All the posts and additional posts expected to be sanctioned were filled up and therefore, the petitioner could not be appointed as UPSA. The Manager had appointed the second petitioner as UPSA to be accommodated in the additional post of LPSA which was expected to be sanctioned. The petitioner is not a T.T.C. holder. 3. In Exhibit P7 order passed by the Government also, the same grounds were taken for rejection of the request for approval of the appointment. 4. It is submitted that the ban on appointment was withdrawn as per G.O.(P) No. 10/10/G. Edn. dated 12/1/2010 (Exhibit P10). So one of the grounds on which approval of appointment was rejected as UPSA vanishes, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Based on the students strength in the school, it is stated that two additional posts of UPSA and two additional posts of LPSA could be sanctioned in the school. The sanction was not accorded because of the ban on W.P.(C) NO.17909 OF 2008 :: 3 :: appointment. It is also seen that the Manager had appointed two B.Ed degree holders as UPSA in the two additional posts. It is not disputed that the appointment of the petitioner, if made as LPSA, cannot be approved since she is not qualified to be appointed as LPSA. It is also not in dispute that there is no post to accommodate the petitioner as UPSA. On these grounds, strictly speaking, appointment of the petitioner cannot be approved. The petitioner submits that one A. Geetha, who is working as UPSA in the school and who is also a T.T.C holder, is willing to be shifted as LPSA in the same school, so that in the resultant vacancy, the petitioner could be accommodated. It is stated that Mrs. A. Geetha is willing for such shifting. The petitioner relies on Exhibit P6 Government Order dated 1/3/2007, whereby such shifting was allowed by the Government. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the shifting of UPSA as LPSA is not permissible after the amendment of Rule 3 of Chapter XXXI of Kerala Education Rules and as per the Government orders issued W.P.(C) NO.17909 OF 2008 :: 4 :: from time to time. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no additional financial burden to the Government and in such cases, such shifting is being permitted as made in Exhibit P6. 6. In view of the fact that one of the grounds on which approval of appointment was rejected is no more in existence and the Government having not considered the question whether the shifting as mentioned could be permitted, I think it would be proper if the contention put forward by the petitioner in the matter of shifting is considered by the Government, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, the Manager, Mrs. A. Geetha and any other affected parties. Accordingly, Exhibit P7 order is quashed and the Government is directed to dispose of the matter afresh in the light of the observations made above, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. W.P.(C) NO.17909 OF 2008 :: 5 :: The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition, counter affidavit and a copy of I.A. No.9210 of 2010 along with the certified copy of the judgment before the Government. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/