IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2009 / 1ST MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 11 of 2009(B) ----------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ASWATHY.S., HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (SANSKRIT), CHEMMANTHOOR HIGH SCHOOL, PUNALLUR, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PUNALLUR. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION), KOLLAM. 3. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P(C) No. 11 of 2009 (B) --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st January, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner states that she was originally appointed as Part- time Lower Grade Sanskrit Teacher, against a leave vacancy, which was duly approved. It is stated that she was appointed on regular basis as Part-time Lower Sanskrit Teacher w.e.f. 1.6.2005 against a retirement vacancy, which was also approved. Subsequently, the petitioner was appointed as HSA (Sanskrit) w.e.f. 15.7.2005 as per Ext.P1 order of appointment. It is stated that the said appointment was against a new post of HSA (Sanskrit) to be sanctioned due to introduction of Sanskrit in VIIIth Standard on the basis of Rule 6F, Chapter XXIII of the Kerala Education Rules. 2. The District Educational Officer issued Ext.P2 staff fixation order for 2005-06 sanctioning only one post of LG (Sanskrit) Part- time. The Manager challenged Ext.P2 before the Director of Public Instruction by filing appeal. As per Ext.P3 order, the Director of Public Instruction rejected the appeal. The petitioner filed Ext.P4 revision before the Government. Ext.P4 revision was disposed of as per Ext.P5 order dated 12.3.2007. It is stated in Ext.P5 order thus: “I am to request you to convert the existing Part Time Lower Grade Sanskrit post in Chemmanthoor HS, Punalur to Full time HSA(Sankrit) post for the academic year 2005-06, by reckoning the enhanced strength of pupils learning W.P(C) No. 11 of 2009 (B) : 2 : Sanskrit by way of introduction of the subject Sanskrit in Standard VIII in High School.” 3. It would appear that the District Educational Officer sought clarification of Ext.P5 order. The District Educational Officer issued Ext.P6 letter dated 24.9.2007 for that purpose. The Government passed Ext.P8 order dated 31.3.2008 holding thus: “I am to invite your attention to the reference cited and to inform you that the posts of FT Language Teacher (LG) and HSA are not equaled posts. As per G.O(MS) No.72/82/G.Edn. Dated 24.5.82, the part time post of senior and junior language teachers are included in the feeder category of full time posts of HSAs. As per Rule 12 to Chapter XXIII KERs, a new division cannot be granted on revisit which was not in the staff fixation in the previous year. Therefore the conversion of the post of FT language Teacher (LG) to that of an has is not admissible based on student strength on revisit.” 4. The contention of the petitioner is that Ext.P8 order was passed without hearing her and without affording an opportunity to put forward her grievance. It is submitted that the Government have no power to review or issue a clarification as has been done in Ext.P8. The learned Senior Government Pleader, on instruction, could not dispute the contention of the petitioner that Ext.P8 order was passed without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Therefore Ext.P8 order is liable to be quashed. I do so. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no ground to revise or modify Ext.P5 order. He also submitted that the Government have no power to alter, modify, revise or review Ext.P5 order. Ext.P8 order is now quashed. What should follow is that W.P(C) No. 11 of 2009 (B) : 3 : Ext.P5 order is revived, unless Ext.P5 order ceases to have any effect, on account of passing an order which could be sustained under the Kerala Education Act and Rules. Any such proceeding should be issued after notice to the petitioner. If the Government feels that any further steps are to be taken in the matter, the same can be done only after issuing the notice to the petitioner and after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. In such an event, the petitioner would be entitled to raise her contentions against initiating any such proceedings by the Government. 6. In the aforesaid reasons the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P8 order is quashed. 7. It is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The disposal of the writ petition is without prejudice to any proceeding being taken in accordance with the Kerala Education Act and Rules. It is made clear that if the Government have to initiate any proceeding in the matter, it should be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner shall forward a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment to the 4th respondent by registered post within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. K.T.SANKARAN ab JUDGE W.P(C) No. 11 of 2009 (B) : 4 :