IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32155 of 2010(T) PETITIONER: P.M.ANILA, W/O.P.J.ROOPAK, AGED 30 YEARS UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, S.D.P.Y.BOYS HIGH SCHOOL, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI- 682 006. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.M.SAJJAD SRI.V.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: 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 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM-11. 4. THE MANAGER, S.D.P.Y. SCHOOLS, PALLURUTHY-682 006. 5. THE HEADMASTER, S.D.P.Y.GIRLS VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PALLURUTHY-682 006. 6. THE HEADMASTER, S.D.P.Y.BOYS HIGH SCHOOL, PALLURUTHY-682 006. 7. SMT.NISHA ARAVIND, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, S.D.P.Y.G.V.H.S.SCHOOL, PALLURUTHY- 682 006. 8. SMT.SANDHYA K.V., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, S.D.P.Y.G.V.H.S. SCHOOL, PALLURUTHY- 682 006. 9. SMT.SINDHU G.NAIR, TEACHER, S.D.P.Y.G.V.H.S.SCHOOL, PALLURUTHY- 682 006. 10. SMT.JIJI, TEACHER, S.D.P.Y.G.V.H.S. SCHOOL, PALLURUTHY- 682 006. 11. SMT.SANTHA C.V., TEACHER, S.D.P.Y.BOYS HIGH SCHOOL, PALLURUTHY- 682 006. R4 TO 7, 9&10 BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C). NO. 32155 OF 2010 T ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The case of the petitioner is the following: The petitioner is working as UPSA in SDPY BHS, Palluruthy. The petitioner has approved service as UPSA with effect from 2.6.2004. During the academic year 2010-2011, due to the reduction in the students strength, reduction of certain class divisions in U.P.Sections and L.P.Sections would be inevitable. It is stated that there is a promotion vacancy of UPSA and two leave vacancies of UPSA and therefore, the regular UPSAs have no threat of retrenchment. According to the petitioner, while effecting retrenchment, the question to be considered is whether the teachers have to be retrenched based on their total seniority disregarding the seniority in the cadre of LPSA or UPSA or seniority in the respective cadre. 2. The management issued Ext.P6 combined seniority list of LPSA and UPSA. The rank of the petitioner is shown as 69 in Ext.P6, while the rank of respondents 7 to 11 are respectively 56, 44, 52, 55 and 10. The petitioner says that the position of respondents 7 W.P.(C) NO.32155 OF 2010 :: 2 :: to 11 in the seniority list would not enable them to get any preference to continue in the School by shifting them as UPSA and thereby retrenching the petitioner. The petitioner came to know that in order to retain respondents 7 to 11, they were shifted as UPSAs by the Manager. The petitioner approached the District Educational Officer objecting to ratification of such shifting, which would necessarily cause retrenchment of the petitioner. As per the direction in W.P.(C) No.25906 of 2010, the District Educational Officer disposed of the representation submitted by the petitioner by Ext.P8 order dated 20.9.2010, rejecting the claim of the petitioner. Aggrieved by Ext.P8 order passed by the District Educational Officer, the petitioner submitted Ext.P9 Revision before the Government. Ext.P9 Revision is pending disposal. Along with Ext.P9 Revision, the petitioner submitted Ext.P9(a) application for stay and that application is also pending. 3. Though several reliefs are prayed for in the Writ Petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would be sufficient, for the time being, if the first respondent is directed to consider and dispose of Ext.P9 Revision expeditiously. W.P.(C) NO.32155 OF 2010 :: 3 :: In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P9 Revision filed by the petitioner, 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, respondents 4 to 11 and any other affected party. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/