IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2010 / 13TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 23551 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MOLLY.T.SEBASTIAN, W/O.THOMAS.M.A., H.S.A. (MALAYALAM), ST.JOHN'S HIGH SCHOOL, ELANADU, RESIDING AT MANJALY HOUSE, KANNMBRA P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, GENERAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. JOINT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. 5. THE MANAGER, CORPORATE MANAGEMENT OF SCHOOLS, DIOCESE OF MUVATTUPUZHA, PIRAVAM, ERNAKULAM-686664. 6. THE HEADMISTRESS, ST.JOHN'S HIGH SCHOOL, ELANADU-680 586. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.23551 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT In the manner in which I propose to dispose of the Writ Petition, I do not think it is necessary to issue notice to respondent Nos.5 and 6. The learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 to 4. 2. The petitioner is working as High School Assistant (Malayalam) in St.John's High School, Elanadu. She was appointed on 5.6.2000. It is stated that the petitioner has been working in the school without any break in service. However, she has not received salary for the period from 1.1.2007 to 14.7.2007. According to the petitioner, this consequence occurred as a result of several Government Orders issued successively, one clarifying the other and again clarifying the later ones. 3. As stated earlier, the petitioner was appointed on 5.6.2000. It is stated that there were three posts of HSA (Malayalam) in the school. The Government issued G.O.(MS) WPC No.23551/2010 2 No.237/2000/G.Edn. dated 15.7.2000 (Ext.P1) wherein it was provided that no post of HSA (Malayalam) would be sanctioned from the beginning of the academic year 2000-2001 reckoning the number of students in other languages. Ext.P1 Government Order was modified by G.O.(MS) No.305/2000/G.Edn. dated 2.9.2000 (Ext.P2) wherein it was clarified that Ext.P1 would be followed in respect of appointments made prospectively. In short, the existing language teachers would not come under the purview of Ext.P1 Government Order. As per G.O.(MS) No.317/01/Gen. Edn. dated 24.10.2001 (Ext.P3), the time stipulation Ext.P2 was extended and it was provided that the principle adopted in Ext.P1 would be followed for appointments made from 2001-2002 only. The educational officers were directed as per G.O.(MS) No.6/02/G.Edn. dated 3.1.2002 (Ext.P4) to review staff fixation orders for the year 2000-2001 accordingly. Later, Ext.P3 Government Order was further modified by G.O.(MS) No.135/04/Gen.Edn. dated 15.5.2004 (Ext.P5) wherein the relevant academic year was provided as 2002-2003. 4. The case of the petitioner is that as she was appointed WPC No.23551/2010 3 on 5.6.2000, Exhibits P2, P3 and P5 Government Orders are applicable to her and therefore, there was no question of reduction of any post. Since one post was reduced, the Manager (respondent No.5) filed a petition before the District Educational Officer. It is stated that the District Educational Officer rejected that application. Copy of the order is not produced and it is stated that the copy is not available. It is also stated that challenging the order passed by the District Educational Officer, the Manager filed Ext.P7 appeal dated 20.7.2007 before the Director of Education, the second respondent. The Joint Director of Public Instruction (respondent No.3) dismissed the appeal, as per Ext.P8 order dated 10.8.2009. Challenging Ext.P8 order, the Manager filed Ext.P9 revision dated 15.9.2009 before the Government. It is stated that Ext.P9 is pending disposal. 5. Meanwhile, one Aniamma.T. working as HSA (Malayalam) in the school was shifted to another school under the same educational agency in a retirement vacancy with effect from 1.6.2007. The petitioner was accommodated to one of the approved post of HSA (Malayalam). Her contention was that in these circumstances, she was entitled to get approval of her WPC No.23551/2010 4 service for the period from 15.6.2006 to 14.7.2007. However, the appointment during that period was not approved and the service benefits were not granted to her. It is also stated that the salary of the petitioner for the period from 1.1.2007 to 14.7.2007 was withheld. In these circumstances, the petitioner filed Ext.P10 dated 30.11.2009 before the District Educational Officer. It is stated that Ext.P10 is also pending. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader submitted that what is required to be done is to dispose of Ext.P9 revision pending before the Government. Ext.P10 could be considered only after the disposal of Ext.P9 revision. It is also submitted that the petitioner has no contention contrary to the contention raised by the Manager in Ext.P9 revision. 7. In the facts and circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: (i) The first respondent shall dispose of Ext.P9 revision dated 15.9.2009 filed by the Manager, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate within a period of three months after affording WPC No.23551/2010 5 an opportunity of being heard to the Manager, the petitioner and any other affected party. (ii) The District Educational Officer shall dispose of Ext.P10 petition dated 30.11.2009 filed by the petitioner within six weeks after the disposal of Ext.P9 revision by the first respondent. The petitioner shall produce copy of the Writ Petition and exhibits along with a certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent without delay. The petitioner shall also send copy of the judgment to respondents 5 and 6 by Registered Post and shall produce proof of the same before the first respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl