IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2008 / 15TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 5414 of 2008(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- S.SREEKUMARI, HSA (SANSKRIT), VHSS CHATHIYARA, THAMARAKULAM, RESIDING AT PUTHENMADOM, KADUVINAL P.O., VALLIKUNNAM 690 501. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.RAJAN SRI.C.K.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MAVELIKKARA. 4. THE MANAGER, VHSS CHATHIYARA, THAMARAKULAM. 5. G.MURALEEDHARAN PILLAI, HEADMASTER, VHSS CHATHIYARA, THAMARAKULAM. ADV. SRI.T.K.MARTHANDAN UNNITHAN FOR R4-5 SRI.V.JAYAKUMAR FOR R4-5 GOVT.PLEADER SMT.T.B.REMANI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.5414/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 12.4.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT 31.5.2007 IN WPC NO.16609/07 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.8/07-08 DT 18.6.07 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 23.607 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.7.07 IN WPC NO.22097/07 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT 14.9.07 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.11.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.11.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B3/23741/07 DT 29.8.08 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ALAPUZHA. EXTS. OF R4 EXT.R4(a): TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT DT 13.9.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT-MANAGER BEFORE THE DEO, MAVELIKKARA. EXT.R4(b): TRUE COPY OF APPEAL PETITION DT 3.11.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT MANAGER BEFORE THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION. EXT.R4(c): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT 28.6.2008 ISSUED BY THE DEO, MAVELIKKARA. EXT.R4(d): TRUE COPY OF REPLY DT 10.7.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT G.MURALEEDHARAN PILLAI. EXT.R4(e): TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER NO.B6.5229/08 DDIS DT 19.7.08 FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2008-09. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 5414 OF 2008 (T) ==================== Dated this the 7th day of October, 2008 J U D G M E N T The claim of the petitioner is for appointment as Headmistress in VHSS, Chathiyara, of which the 4th respondent is the Manager. 2. Petitioner submits that the vacancy arose w.e.f.1/6/07 and that ignoring her superior claim, the 4th respondent appointed the 5th respondent. Petitioner filed an appeal to the 3rd respondent and that resulted in Ext.P6 order allowing the appeal and directing that she be appointed as Headmistress in the place of the 5th respondent. It is essentially complaining of non implementation of Ext.P6, this writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also invites my attention to Ext.P9, a notice issued by the Deputy Director of Education, Alleppey directing implementation of Ext.P6 and calling upon the Manager to show cause why proceedings shall not be initiated under Chapter III Rule 7 KER. On behalf of the Manager, the prayer is resisted contending that he has filed Ext.R4(b) appeal against Ext.P6 before the Deputy Director of Education and that in view of the pendency of the appeal, Ext.P6 has not become final and therefore, is not liable to be implemented. WPC 5414/08 :2 : 4. But then, fact remains that the Appellate Authority has not passed any interlocutory order deferring implementation of Ext.P6. Therefore, Ext.P6 has to be implemented as directed by the 3rd respondent and also by the Deputy Director in Ext.P9. 5. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the 4th respondent shall implement Ext.P6 subject to the outcome of Ext.R4(b) appeal pending before the Deputy Director of Education, Alleppey. Needless to say that the Deputy Director shall consider Ext.R4 (b) appeal filed by the Manager with notice to the petitioner and the 5th respondent and adverting to the contentions raised by the parties. It is seen that subsequently, Ext.R4(e) has been issued by the 3rd respondent ordering deployment of the petitioner on the ground that she is a protected teacher. In view of the fact that her claim for promotion as Headmistress w.e.f. 1/6/07 stand upheld by Ext.P6, unless Ext.P6 is implemented soon, consequence of Ext.R4(e) may visit on the petitioner. Therefore, it is ordered that Ext.P6 will be implemented, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp