IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2008 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 27908 of 2007(V) PETITIONER: ------------ R.KRISHNAVENI, W/O.GOPALAKRISHNA KAMMATH, AGED 39, PEON, DEVASWOM BOARD HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, THRIKKARIYOOR, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE SECRETARY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTHAMANGALAM. R1, R3 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.R.SABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/10/2005 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1/3/2005 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 9/11/2005 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.12.2005 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.1.2006 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 1/3/2007 OF THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.5.2007 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// AHZ/ K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 27908 OF 2007 V -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th June, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner, while working as full time menial in Devaswom Board Higher Secondary School, Thrikkariyoor, was promoted and posted as Peon in D.B.H.S.S., Thiruvalla with effect from 1.3.2005, as per Ext.P2 appointment order dated 1.3.2005. The second respondent, the Secretary, Travancore Devaswom Board, Trivandrum, who is the Corporate Manager of the School, forwarded the proposal for approval of the District Educational Officer, Thiruvalla. The third respondent issued Ext.P4 letter dated 12.12.2005 to the second respondent stating that though the petitioner's promotion as Peon was with effect from 1.3.2005, she joined duty only on 1.11.2005. It is also stated that the proposal for approval was received only on 15.11.2005. The second respondent was directed to show cause as to why action under Rule 51A note 2 of Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules may not be taken. As per Ext.P5 order dated 20.1.2006, issued by the District Educational Officer, Thiruvalla, sanction was accorded to the petitioner to draw the lower scale salary as a temporary measure counting her against the post of Peon till the appointment on promotion is approved. It was also noted in Ext.P5 that it would not confer any right on the petitioner for approval of the promotion as Peon. Challenging Exts.P4 and P5, the petitioner filed Ext.P6 representation before respondents 2 and 3. After considering W.P.(C) NO.27908 OF 2007 :: 2 :: Ext.P6, the District Educational Officer issued Ext.P7 letter dated 14.5.2007, to the Headmaster of the School stating that the Manager did not produce the relevant details regarding the approval of lien adjustment etc. till date and that the proposal for approval of the appointment of the petitioner was returned to the Manager for resubmission, but the Manager has not resubmitted the papers. 2. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following: “a) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to resubmit the appointment proposal of the petitioner to the 3rd respondent duly furnishing necessary documents/details required for getting approval of appointment. b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to approve Exhibit P2, appointing the petitioner as peon in D.B.H.S.S. Thiruvalla under the 2nd respondent w.e.f.1.3.05 onwards with all consequential benefits. c) Issue such other appropriate writ, order or direction, that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the third respondent. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was appointed in the vacancy of one K.Balan, who retired from service on 28.2.2005. Ext.P2 appointment order was issued only on 29.10.2005 making the appointment with effect from 1.3.2005, the date on which the vacancy W.P.(C) NO.27908 OF 2007 :: 3 :: arose. It is also stated that the petitioner joined duty on 1.11.2005 only. The stand taken in the counter affidavit is that there is no provision in the Kerala Education Rules to issue appointment order with retrospective effect. The appointment order takes effect only on the incumbent joining duty. The petitioner having joined duty only on 1.11.2005, it is stated that the third respondent is not in a position to approve her appointment with effect from 1.3.2005. In answer to this contention, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner would be satisfied if her appointment is approved with effect from 1.11.2005. 4. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that though the third respondent requested the second respondent to produce copies of the orders of approval, the second respondent has not furnished the relevant details to the third respondent. It is pointed out that the delay and difficulties were caused only because of the non-co-operation by the second respondent and due to the failure of the second respondent to produce the relevant documents and records. 5. Since the petitioner has made it clear that it is sufficient that her appointment is approved with effect from 1.11.2005, there need not be any impediment in the matter of approving the appointment. However, before considering the question of appointment, the Educational Officer W.P.(C) NO.27908 OF 2007 :: 4 :: has to satisfy that the appointment is otherwise regular and, for that purpose, it is necessary to peruse the relevant documents. The second respondent is duty bound to produce all the relevant records called for by the third respondent. There will be a direction to the second respondent to produce all the relevant records before the third respondent to facilitate the third respondent to take a final decision in the matter of approval of the appointment of the petitioner as Peon. The second respondent shall comply with this direction within a period of one month from today. The third respondent shall dispose of the matter within a period of one month thereafter. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/