IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 31906 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.JAYALEKSHMI, U.P.S.A, SREE VIVEKANANDA HIGH SCHOOL, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.J.MATHEW SRI.PRATHEESH.P RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA 689 540. 4. THE MANAGER, SREE VIVEKANANDA HIGH SCHOOL, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689 548. ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.31906 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was appointed as U.P.S.A. in S.V.H.S., Pullad, Thiruvalla in the leave vacancy of one Renuka for the period from 5.6.2006 to 30.10.2010. The petitioner claims that she is a Rule 51A claimant. The District Educational Officer rejected the proposal for approval of appointment of the petitioner on the ground that P.C.Supriya (HSA), who was rendered surplus, was to be reverted as U.P.S.A. consequent on the staff fixation order for the year 2006-2007. It was held that Supriya was to be reverted as U.P.S.A. in the vacancy of Renuka. Challenging the order passed by the District Educational Officer, the Manager filed an appeal before the Director of Public Instruction. That appeal was rejected as per Exhibit P1 order dated 26.6.2008. Aggrieved by Exhibit P1 order, the petitioner filed Exhibit P2 revision before the Government. Exhibit P2 is pending disposal. WPC No.31906/2010 2 2. Supriya has a contention that going by the Government Order allowing teacher student ratio at 1:40, she could be retained as HSA. But her request was turned out by the Educational Officer as well as by the Government. Later, the Government issued G.O.(P) No.41/2010/G.Edn. dated 20.3.2010 on which Supriya relies on. Supriya filed Writ Petition No.15437 of 2009, which was disposed of as per Exhibit P3 judgment dated 9th June, 2010 directing the Government to reconsider the matter in the light of G.O.(P) No.41/2010/Gen.Edn. dated 20.3.2010. It is stated that the matter is pending before the Government and the case is posted to 30th November, 2010. 3. There is not much conflict of interest between the petitioner and Supriya. The appointment of the petitioner would be approved only if Supriya is retained as HSA. To that extent, the petitioner wishes the revision filed by Supriya to succeed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if the matter now pending before the Government in the case of Supriya and Exhibit P2 revision filed by the petitioner WPC No.31906/2010 3 are considered together, an effective adjudication would be possible. 4. In the facts and circumstances, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider and dispose of Exhibit P2 revision filed by the petitioner along with the revision filed by Supriya, which was directed to be disposed of as per the judgment dated 9th June, 2010 in W.P.(C) No.15437 of 2009, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of two months from today, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, Supriya and the Manager. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl