IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 25TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 6507 of 2009(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SAYYID MUHAMMED RAFEEK.K., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT (UPSA), AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. VIDHU P., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT (UPSA), AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. NIMA A.M., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT (UPSA), AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. SHAHIDA A.T., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT (UPSA), AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. ANEES BABU O., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT (UPSA), AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. SAKKEER HUSSAIN T.P., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT (UPSA), AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI V.T.K.MOHANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.6507/2009-G ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 16th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T All the petitioners herein are Upper Primary School Assistants who have been appointed by various orders. The challenge is against Exts.P1 to P6 as far as the same declines approval of appointment on the respective dates of appointments. Approval was granted only from 10/11/2006 to 30/03/2007 and thereafter from 01/06/2007 onwards. According to the petitioners there was no protected teacher available during the academic year 2006-07 and hence there was no basis for the reasoning adopted in rejecting the approval stating that the Manager had set apart one post of UPSA for appointment of a protected teacher with effect from 10/11/2006 and therefore their appointments can be approved only from 10/11/2006. It is also submitted that going by the agreement executed by the Manager in terms of Rule 6 (VIII) of Chapter-V K.E.R, duty is cast upon the Manager to absorb protected teachers. 2. It is the contention of the petitioners that a reading of Ext.P9 will show that there was no protected teacher in Wandoor District. Reliance is placed on the judgment rendered by this Court in Moosakutty vs. DEO W.P.(C). No.6507/2009 -:2:- [2009 (3) KLT 863]. It relates to the same Educational Sub District and the same school also. The learned counsel for the petitioners therefore, pray that in the light of the above judgment, the District Educational Officer may be directed to approve the appointments of the petitioners with effect from their respective dates of appointments. 3. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to take a fresh decision in the matter in the light of the dictum laid down in Moosakutty's case [2009 (3) KLT 863] within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The question raised by the petitioners should be considered in the light of the legal issue decided by this Court in the said judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms