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. 16943 of 2009(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KRISHNA PRASAD.M.K., S/O.RAMANKUTTY, L.P.S.A.TEACHER, A.L.P.SCHOOL, MUNDAKKOTTUKURUSSI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, RESIDING AT KAKKASSERY HOUSE, MUNDAKKOTTUKURUSSI P.O., OTTAPALAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM SRI.RAMDAS M. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTE DBY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OTTAPALAM. 5. THE MANAGER, A.L.P.SCHOOL, MUNDAKKOTTUKURUSSI P.O.-679 122, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 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.16943 of 2009-K - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner was appointed as L.P.S.A. by the fifth respondent Manager on 19.11.2008 against the vacancy that arose due to the resignation of one Smt. P. Jisha, LPSA from 18.11.2008. The District Educational Officer approved the said appointment only on daily wage basis from 19.11.2008 to 31.3.2009 in view of G.O.(P) No.104/2008/G.Edn. dated 10.6.2008. The above Govt. Order is produced as Ext.P2. 2. 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 wpc 16943/2009 2 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.” 3. The petitioner filed Ext.P4 representation to the 4th respondent along with a copy of the above judgment, seeking for approval of her appointment on regular basis. He filed an identical representation to the third respondent also, as per Ext.P5. Exts.P4 and P5 are pending consideration. Since Ext.P5 is pending before the third respondent, there will be a direction to the third respondent to consider and pass orders on the same in the light of the findings rendered by the Division Bench in the wpc 16943/2009 3 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 third respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/