IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2009 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30771 of 2009(N) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- V.P. PRIYANKA, W/O.K.RAGESH, AGED 23 YEARS, LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT PANAKKAD POOKOYA THANGAL MEMORIAL A.L.P.SCHOOL, PUNNAKKAD, KOLATHUR, MALAPPURAM-679 338. BY ADV. MR.V.A.MUHAMMED MR.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CIVIL STATION,MALAPPURAM. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MANKADA,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. THE MANAGER, PANAKKAD POOKOYA THANGAL MEMORIAL A.L.P.SCHOOL, PUNNAKKAD,KOLATHOOR, MALAPPURAM-679 338. R1 TO R5 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.MUHAMOOD T.T. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.30771 of 2009-N - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of October, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as Lower Primary School Assistant in Panakkad Pookoya Thangal Memorial A.L.P. School, Punnakkad. The petitioner was appointed as such on 1.6.2007. Initially, the Assistant Educational Officer declined to grant approval. On appeal the District Educational Officer ordered approval as per Ext.P1 and thereafter by Ext.P2 approval was granted. 2. Ext.P2 is dated 12.3.2008. More than one year after, the Deputy Director of Education raised an objection as per Ext.P3. The main objection raised therein is that a fresh hand has been appointed without adjusting/appointing protected teachers in the school. The manager submitted Ext.P4 explanation. It is the case of the petitioner that on going through Ext.P5, it can be seen that there were no protected teachers available as on the date of her appointment. Ultimately, by Ext.P11 the Additional Director of Public Instruction cancelled the appointment of the petitioner with effect from 1.6.2007. Ext.P12 is the revision petition filed against the said order by the manager and Ext.P13 is the revision petition wpc 30771/2009 2 filed by the petitioner. 3. The petitioner contends that in the light of the fact that no protected teachers were available as on that date, the present order cannot be supported. Reliance is placed on Exts.P7, P8 and P14 judgments of this Court. 4. Since the matter is pending in revision before the Government, there will be a direction to the Government to take a decision on Exts.P12 and P13 after hearing the petitioner and the manager, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till then, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P11 will be kept in abeyance. The payment of salary to the petitioner will depend upon the outcome of the revision petitions. The writ petitions are disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/