IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2009 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 17051 of 2009(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. V.R.SHEENA, D/O. V.A.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 34 YERARS,LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT RAMA RAJA MEMORIAL U.P.SCHOOL, PUNNAYOORKULAM CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DIST. 2. SHINY KANDAMPULLY W/O. ANILKUMAR PERUMBAL, AGED 34 YEARS, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT RAMA RAJ MEMORIAL U.P.SCHOOL PUNNAYOORKULAM, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DIST. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DIST. 5. THE MANAGER, RAMA RAJA MEMORIAL U.P.SCHOOL PUNNAYOORKULAM CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DIST SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 17051 of 2009-B - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioners were appointed as LPSA/UPSA from 30.6.2008 by the 5th respondent Manager in permanent vacancies. The appointments were approved only on daily wage basis citing Ext.P2, G.O.(P) No.104/08/G.Edn. dated 10.6.2008 which is evident from Exts.P3 and P4. Even though the Manager filed an appeal as per Ext.P5, no decision is taken yet in the said appeal. 2. The petitioners challenge Exts.P1 and P2 Government Orders , on account of which, an objection has been raised by the Educational Authority regarding the approval of petitioners' appointment. 3. This court in a batch of cases, reported in Unni Narayanan v. State of Kerala (2009 (2) KLT 604) held that without amending the statutory rules, a Government Order cannot be pressed into service. Ext.P2 herein, was under challenge in those cases. It was held that “if the vacancy is having a duration of one academic year or more, appointment can be made to fill up the same. The term of appointment need not be co-terminus 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 wpc 17051/2009 2 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.” 4. In the light of the above, Exts.P3 and P4 to the extent to which approval is given only on daily wages basis is quashed. The fourth respondent will pass fresh orders in the light of the findings rendered by the Division Bench in the above decision, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the judgment of the Division Bench referred to above, before the fourth respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) wpc 17051/2009 3 kav/