IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 17913 of 2008(G) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. AMEENA VAHID, W/O HAKIM, AGED 28 YEARS, FULL-TIME MENAIL, MAHAKAVI KUMARAN ASAN MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL, PALLANA 690 515, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. D.PREMKUMAR, CLERK, MAHAKAVI KUMARAN ASAN MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL, PALLANA 690 515, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.K.E.HAMZA SRI.M.SAJJAD RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ALAPPUZHA. 4. THE DIST5ICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. 5. THE MANAGER, MAHAKAVI KUMARAN ASAN MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL, PALLANA 690 515, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY G.P. SHRI A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN,J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.17913 of 2008 G -------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008. J U D G M E N T In the manner in which I propose to dispose of the Writ Petition, I do not think it is necessary to issue notice to the respondent No.5. Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 to 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the Government Pleader that the Writ Petition itself can be disposed of. 2. The first petitioner was appointed as Full Time Menial on 3.4.2006 in Mahakavi Kumaranasan Memorial High School, Pallana in Alappuzha District. That school is an aided school. The appointment of the first petitioner was in the promotion vacancy of the second petitioner as Peon. It is stated that the second petitioner entered service as Full Time Menial on 1.11.1999 and he was promoted as Peon on 1.4.2006 and as Clerk with effect from 1.6.2007. As per Ext.P1 dated 11.6.2007, the appointment of the second petitioner as Full Time Menial was approved with effect from 1.11.1999. The District Educational Officer, Alappuzha declined the approval of the promotion of the second petitioner as Peon. The order of the District Educational Officer was 2 confirmed by the Deputy Director of Education of Education. Challenging those orders, the Manager of the school has filed Ext.P2 revision dated 5.12.2007 before the Government. Ext.P2 revision is pending disposal. It is stated that the disposal of Ext.P2 revision would have great impact on the question of approval of the appointment of the first petitioner as Full Time Menial since he was appointed in the promotion vacancy of the second petitioner as Peon. It is also stated that the approval of the appointment of the first petitioner as Full Time Menial was declined by the District Educational Officer mainly on the ground that there is no established vacancy. Against that order of the District Educational Officer, the Manager of the school has filed Ext.P4 appeal. 3. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:- “(a) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 4th Respondent District Educational Officer to grant approval to the appointment and promotion of the Petitioners as Full-time Menial from 3-4-2006 and Peon from 1-4-2006 expeditiously. (b) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 1st Respondent to effectively consider and pass appropriate orders upon Exhibit P-2 after affording an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner within a time limit. 3 (c) pass such other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the circumstances of the case.” 4. Since Ext.P2 revision dated 5.12.2007 is pending before the first respondent, the learned counsel for the petitioners confines the reliefs to relief No.(b) in the Writ Petition. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the Government would dispose of Ext.P2 revision without much delay. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P2 revision after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners as well the fifth respondent Manager, expeditiously, and at any rate within a period of three months. Since notice is not issued to the fifth respondent, the petitioners shall send a copy of this judgment to the fifth respondent Manager and shall produce proof of the same before the first respondent while considering Ext.P2 revision. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. cks