IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15524 of 2010(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SREEVIJI.P., L.P.SCHOOL ASSISTANT, A.S.B.SCHOOL, MANHALLUR P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE ABRAHAM. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. A.E.O, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR EDUCATION, PALAKKAD. 3. DIRECTOR, PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. DILEEP MOHAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/05/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 15524 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was working as Lower Primary School Assistant in A.S.B School, Manhallur. Pursuant to Ext.P3 staff fixation order for the year 2009-2010 certain divisions in the school were reduced. Consequently, the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P4 order deploying the petitioner to Govt. L.P School, Perumbarachalla. The contention of the petitioner is that by virtue of Ext.P5 G.O. Dated, 26.7.1999, she is entitled to get the same school protection subject to certain conditions specifically mentioned in the said Government Order. Despite her entitlement to get same school protection in terms of the said Government Order, she was relieved pursuant to Ext.P4 order dated 2.3.2010. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P4 and the consequential action in relieving her from the school the petitioner has approached the 4th respondent by filing Ext.P7 representation. So far no orders have been passed on Ext.P7, it is submitted. It is in this circumstances that this writ petition has been filed by the WPC.15524/2010 : 2 : petitioner. 2. As noticed herein before, the petitioner places reliance on Ext.P5 Government Order to claim same school protection. That apart, it is her contention that by virtue of Ext.P6 judgment, the respondents cannot contend that the provisions in Ext.P5 Government Order and G.O(P) No. 178/02/Gen.Edn. dated 28.6.2002 are not in force. In fact, it is raising such claims based on the above contentions that Ext.P7 revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner before the 4th respondent. Considering the fact that Ext.P7 revision petition is pending before the 4th respondent, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 4th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 revision petition expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that while passing orders thereon, the 4th respondent shall look into Ext.P5 Government Order dated 26.7.1999 as also Ext.P6 judgment of this court. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge