IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32355 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAIMY MATHEW, LPSA, NADUKARA ST L.P. SCHOOL, MUVATTUPUZHA, RESIDING AT THOTTATHIL, VADATTUPARA, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SRI.T.R.SADEESAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM- 695001. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THODUPUZHA- 685584. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.32355 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as LPSA at Nadukara ST L.P. School which is under the management of a Corporate Educational Agency. The petitioner was initially appointed as UPSA in Little Flower UPS, Nediakad under the same educational agency for the period from 9.12.2004 to 4.3.2005 as per Exhibit P1 appointment order. However, the appointment was approved only on daily wage basis for that period. It is stated that subsequently the petitioner was appointed for short spells during 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2009 and that all those appointments were approved on daily wage basis. The contention of the petitioner is that in view of the decision in Abdurahiman vs. Government of Kerala (2009(2) KLT 105), the petitioner is entitled for approval of appointment as per Exhibit P1 not on the basis of daily wages, but on regular basis. It was held in Abdurahiman's case that the amendment to Rule 51A of Chapter XIVA of the Kerala Education Rules has only WPC No.32355/2010 2 prospective effect. Raising this contention, the petitioner filed Exhibit P3 revision dated 21st September, 2010 before the Government. Exhibit P3 is pending disposal. 2. The only relief sought for by the petitioner is to direct the first respondent to dispose of Exhibit P3 revision, expeditiously. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows : (i) The first respondent shall dispose of Exhibit P3 revision, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, Manager and any other affected party. (ii) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl WPC No.32355/2010 3