IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD SEPTEMBER 2008 / 12TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26667 of 2008(Y) PETITIONER : MANJUSHA M.K. HSST COMMERCE,S.N. HSS, OKKAL, PERUMBAVOOR BY ADV. SRI.BENOY THOMAS RESPONDENTS: 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 26667 OF 2008 Y -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd September, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as HSST Commerce at SN Higher Secondary School, Okkal, Perumbavoor with effect from 24.8.1998. It is stated that her services were approved by the Director of Higher Secondary Education from 24.8.1998 onwards as per Ext.P1 order. Ext.P1 was passed subject to the condition that the petitioner shall pass B.Ed. Degree within three years from the date of appointment. The period was being extended from time to time and finally till 1.11.2008. It is stated that the petitioner availed leave without allowance for undergoing B.Ed. Course in Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam. She acquired B.Ed. Degree as evidenced by Ext.P2 certificate. 2. Petitioner states that she is having M.Com. Degree and that it was not necessary to acquire B.Ed. Degree in view of the Government Orders at the time of appointment of the petitioner. However, it is stated that she has acquired B.Ed. Degree as well. The petitioner claims the same treatment given to the beneficiaries of Ext.P7 Government Order, G.O.(Rt)No.102/04/Gl.Edn. Dated 7.1.2004. Pointing out the grievance of the petitioner, she has submitted Ext.P15 representation dated 1.8.2008 W.P.(C) NO. 26667 OF 2008 :: 2 :: before the Government. Ext.P15 is pending disposal. The prayer in Ext.P15 is to regularise the service of the petitioner with effect from her date of appointment and to disburse all the attendant benefits. 3. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following: “i) Declare that Ext.P4 GO dated 11.12.1997 exempting 2nd class M.Com degree holders from B.Ed for appointments as HSSTs held the field as on the date of appointment of the petitioner made on 24.8.1998 and therefore no consequence can entail as far as the service benefits of the petitioner is concerned due to the non possession of B.Ed at the time of appointment and that her services shall not be annulled in view of direction No.3 of Ext.P8 decree in Dollichan's case and that her services stand regularised w.e.f. the date of appointment as evident from Ext.P15 GO dated 25.11.2000. ii) Declare that the 2nd respondent has no authority to prescribe a condition that the petitioner should pass B.Ed within 3 years in Ext.P1 approval order which was not in existence at the time of appointment of the petitioner made on 24.8.1998. iii) Declare that the petitioner who acquired B.Ed in Commerce within the extended period of 2 years as per Ext.P12 order which expired only on 1.11.2008 is entitled for regularization as HSST Commerce w.e.f. her date of appointment ie., 24.8.1998 with all attendant benefits including increments, she being an appointee prior to 14.11.2000 and as promised by the Government to such appointees appointed without B.Ed before 14.11.2000, as per Ext.P7 order dated 7.1.2004, notwithstanding the contrary stipulations if any in Ext.P12. W.P.(C) NO. 26667 OF 2008 :: 3 :: iv) Issue a direction directing the 1st respondent Govt. to consider and pass orders on Ext.P15 representation of the petitioner within the time limit to be fixed by this Honourable Court after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. v) Grant such other appropriate writ order or direction as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, for the present, the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P15 representation expeditiously. It is also stated that the petitioner may be permitted to reserve her right to pursue the other remedies at the appropriate stage. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner: a) The first respondent shall consider and dispose of Ext.P15 representation, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and any other person who is likely to be affected, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of three months. b) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. W.P.(C) NO. 26667 OF 2008 :: 4 :: c) It is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/