IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 22ND JUNE 2009 / 1ST ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 11928 of 2009() -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. SARADADEVI, W/O.KRISHNAKUMAR.K., KUTTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O. KODANNUR, PIN – 680 574. 2. ROYMON VARGHESE.A., AINICKAL HOUSE, MANNAMPETTA P.O., VARAKKARA, THRISSUR – 680 325. BY ADV. MR.JIJO PAUL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THRISSUR. 4. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR. 5. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD. *ADDL.R6 IS IMPLEADED: R6. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR (EAST) (*ADDL.R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DTD. 22/06/2009 IN I.A.NO.7541/09) BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. T.T.MUHAMMED THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.11928/2009 I APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER NO.E.D.NO.A.514/2008 DTD. 18/06/2008 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE MANAGER, CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, ARCHDIOCESE OF THRISSUR. P2: COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER NO.E.D.NO.A.479/2008 DTD. 11/06/2008 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE MANAGER, CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, ARCHDIOCESE OF THRISSUR. P3: COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.104/2008/G.EDN. DTD. 10/06/2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF G.O.(P) NO.169/04/G.EDN. DTD. 15/06/2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT DTD. 30/07/2008 IN WPC.NO.21067/2008 AND CONNECTED CASE. P6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B-2604/08/K.DIS. DTD. 04/12/2008 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL 6TH RESPONDENT. P7: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1-195/09/K.DIS. DTD.11/03/2009 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.11928/2009-I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 22nd day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The first petitioner was appointed as Junior Sanskrit (Part Time) Teacher as per Ext.P1 dated 18/06/2008. The second petitioner was appointed as High School Assistant (Malayalam) as per Ext.P2 order dated 11/06/2008. They were appointed in regular vacancies. Exts.P3 and P4 are orders passed by the Government dated 10/06/2008 and 15/06/2004, wherein restrictions were put in regard to the approval of such appointments. Petitioners have also produced along with I.A.No.7542/2009, Exts.P6 and P7 orders by which the approval of appointment of the first petitioner was rejected. As far as the second petitioner is concerned, going by the endorsement in Ext.P2, approval of appointment has been granted only on daily wage basis. The petitioners challenge these orders along with Ext.P3 G.O.(P).No.104/08/G.Edn., dated 10/06/2008. 2. Now the matter is covered by the judgment of this Court in Unni Narayanan v. State of Kerala (2009 (2) KLT 604), wherein it was held that without amending the statutory rules, a Government Order cannot be pressed into service. It was held that “if the vacancy is having a duration W.P.(C). No.11928/2009 -:2:- of one academic year or more, appointment can be made to fill up the same. The term of appointment need not be co-terminous with the term of the vacancy. If, in fact, the vacancy is having a duration of one academic year or more, even if, there is some delay in making the appointment, such appointment will have to be approved.” Ultimately, in para 12, a direction was issued as follows: “12. In the case of the writ petitioners in these cases, orders, if any passed, approving their appointments on daily wage basis, relying on Ext.P2 Government Order are quashed. All appointments, whether pending approval or already rejected, shall be considered/reconsidered by the Educational Officers concerned and fresh orders shall be passed in the light of the declaration of law made by us in W.P.(C) No.25176 of 2008. The salary found due to be paid to the incumbents concerned shall be released immediately. The action in this regard shall be completed within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.” W.P.(C). No.11928/2009 -:3:- 3. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The endorsement in Ext.P2 to the extent to which approval has been granted to the second petitioner only on daily wage basis is set aside. The fifth respondent is directed to pass fresh orders in the light of the directions issued by the Division Bench within a period of two months. As regards the first petitioner, the orders, namely, Exts.P6 and P7 are set aside. The matter will be reconsidered by the additional sixth respondent and appropriate orders will be passed within a period of two months in the light of the directions issued by the Division Bench in Unni Narayanan's case (2009 (2) KLT 604). No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms