IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2011 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 30677 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.ALICE MOLE, DRAWING TEACHER HAMZA UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, MUTTAKKAVU NEDUMPANA P.O., KANNANELLOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN SMT.REVATHY P.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION) KOLLAM-691 001. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER KUNDARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 001. 5. THE MANAGER, HAMZA UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, MUTTAKKAVU, NEDUMPANA P.O., KANNANELLOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 001. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.30677/2010-H ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 18 th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was appointed as a Drawing Teacher initially by the Manager on 02/06/1991 in a retirement vacancy of one Shri Chandapillai who retired on 31/03/1991. The grievance raised in the writ petition is against the non approval of her appointment. It appears that the post was not sanctioned, which was the objection for not approving it. Ext.P1 is the order passed in appeal by the Deputy Director of Education on 30/03/1992. A further revision filed by the Manager before the Director was also rejected as per Ext.P2. Later, this Court in the Judgment, Ext.P3, directed the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation within the time stipulated in the Judgment. Accordingly, the Government passed Ext.P4 order rejecting the representation by relying upon Rule 6B(2) of Chapter XXIII Kerala Education Rules. Later, in the light of the decision of this Court in Govinda Pillai v. State of Kerala [1999 (2) KLT 652], the petitioner filed O.P.No.17584/1998, wherein a direction W.P.(C). No.30677/2010 -:2:- was issued to the Government to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the above decision. It is the case of the petitioner that she has been continuing without getting any salary. 2. Ext.P6 is the order passed by the Government granting regularisation for 46 Physical Education Teachers. But, it is pointed out that the case of Drawing Teachers have not been considered in spite of the above. The revision petition filed before the Government was rejected as per Ext.P8 stating that the post of Drawing Teacher may be sanctioned subject to the condition that minimum strength of 500 pupils in U.P School is fulfilled. 3. It is pointed out that the students strength during 2008-09 has gone above 500 and, thereafter, the petitioner was appointed by the Manager as per Ext.P9 order. It appears that the order dated 17/08/2005 of the Government, with regard to the restriction of appointments in additional division vacancies, resulted in non approval of the appointment again. The petitioner had been moving the Government and various authorities in the matter. W.P.(C). No.30677/2010 -:3:- 4. After the writ petition was filed, along with I.A.No.4610/2011, the petitioner has produced Ext.P15 an order passed by the Assistant Educational Officer rejecting approval of her appointment. One of the objection raised therein is that the Manager has not filed a declaration as per G.O.(P).No.10/10/Gl.Edn., dated 12/01/2010. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has produced Ext.P17 a copy of the declaration filed by the Manager. The petitioner has filed a revision petition before the Government which has been produced as Ext.P16 along with I.A.No.4610/2011. It is prayed that the revision petition may be directed to be disposed of within a time frame. 6. There will be a direction to the Government to take a decision on Ext.P16 revision petition after hearing the petitioner and the Manager within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of the Judgment before the first respondent for compliance. The W.P.(C). No.30677/2010 -:4:- prayers sought for in the writ petition are left open. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms \\TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE