IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2010 / 29TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 26775 of 2010(V) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- M.SREEKALA, W/O.MOHAN, AGED 33 YEARS, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, KURUVANGAS SOUTH U.P.SCHOOL, KOYILANDY EDUCATIONAL SUB DISTRICT, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.M.SAJJAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 520. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 305. 5. THE MANAGER, KURUVANGAD SOUTH U.P.SCHOOL, KOYILANDY EDUCATIONAL SUB DISTRICT, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 305. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. DILIP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 26775 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is presently working as Upper Primary School Assistant in the 5th respondent's school. He was appointed as UPSA with effect from 2.6.2003 and the said appointment was approved. The petitioner is, in fact, aggrieved by Ext.P6 proceedings of the 5th respondent- Manager. Ext.P6 has been issued on account of reduction of post in the category of LPSA taking into account the fact that the person to be retrenched from the category of LPSA got appointment under the 5th respondent prior to the appointment of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, being an appointee to the category of UPSA he could not be shifted to the post of LPSA. The petitioner is now facing retrenchment. When faced with such a situation the petitioner has approached the second respondent by filing Ext.P9 appeal. According to the petitioner though Ext.P8 has also been preferred before the 4th respondent, it cannot be said to be an efficacious one and, in fact, in the light of Ext.P7 passed by WPC.No.26775/2010 : 2 : the 3rd respondent, the question raised by the petitioner cannot be looked into in its true perspective by the 4th respondent, it is submitted. However, the grievances and objections raised by the petitioner in Ext.P9 appeal can be looked into in their true perspective by the second respondent. Taking into account the aforesaid aspects, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P9 expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the petitioner, the 5th respondent and any other teacher who is likely to be effected by a favourable order on Ext.P9. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma