IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 24450 of 2009(A) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- M.SINDHU,W/O.ABRAHAM GEORGE, AGED 34 YEARS, LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, N.M.L.P.SCHOOL,KANAKAPPALAM - 686 509. BY MR.V.A.MUHAMMED, ADVOCATE. MR.K.E.HAMZA, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KANJIRAPPALLY. 4. THE MANAGER, N.M.CORPORATE SCHOOLS,KUMBANAD-689 547. 5. SMT.MOLY KUTTY, LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, N.M.L.P.SCHOOL,OOTTUPARA,RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY MS.S.KARTHIKA, ADVOCATE, FOR R5. MR.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE, FOR R5. MR.M.R.ANISON, ADVOCATE, FOR R5. MS.K.P.GEETHA MANI, ADVOCATE, FOR R5. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/12/2009, ALONG WITH WP(C) No.28676 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 24450/2009 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER No.13135/L2/09/G.EDN. DTD.15.7.09. EXT. P2 : COPY OF REVIEW PETITION FILED BEFORE THE GOVT. BY THE MANAGER DTD. 5.8.09. EXT. P3 : COPY OF CIRCULAR No.4545/J2/2007/G.EDN. DTD.18.5.07 OF THE GOVT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos.24450 & 28676 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of December, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.24450/2009 is aggrieved by Exhibit P1 order passed by the Government. The beneficiary of Exhibit P1 is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.28676/2009 and the main prayer in that writ petition is to quash Exhibits P10 and P11 and implement the above Government Order. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.24450/2009 submitted that Exhibit P1 order will affect the petitioner and several other teachers and they were not heard by the Government while passing the said order. Learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent, who is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.28676/2009, submitted that the said petitioner is a Rule 51A claimant and the Government has recognized the said right. Learned counsel appearing for the 7th respondent in W.P.(C) No.28676/2009 also opposed the prayer of the petitioner therein. W.P.(C) Nos.24450 & 28676/2009 2 3. Admittedly, the Government has not heard any of the affected parties. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.28676/2009 was granted appointment as per Exhibit P1 in a leave vacancy for the period from 09.06.2005 to 08.06.2010. The approval of the same has been granted with effect from 30.06.2005 going by the endorsement therein by the Assistant Educational Officer, Ranni. The trouble arose when the petitioner was appointed as per Exhibit P2 in a later vacancy in another school. The approval of the same was declined by the Educational Officer on the ground that it is an uneconomic school. Again the petitioner was transferred back by the Manager as per Exhibit P3 in a vacancy to which she was granted approval as per Exhibit P1. 4. Exhibit P4 is the order passed by the Deputy Director of Education which, according to the petitioner in W.P(C) No.28676/2009, does not conform to the decision of the Adalath held on 25.10.2008. Ultimately, the Manager issued an order as per Exhibit P6 by which certain lien adjustments have been made. Exhibit P8 is the order passed by the Manager with regard to the lien adjustment of the petitioner from 13.06.2008 to W.P.(C) Nos.24450 & 28676/2009 3 30.07.2008. 5. A reading of the order passed by the Government shows that it requires a re-consideration in the light of the contentions raised by various parties. None of them have been heard and a rehearing is required since the present order if implemented will adversely affect them. To enable the Government to pass a fresh order after hearing various parties, Exhibit P1 in W.P(C) No.24450/2009 is quashed. Since the entire matter will have to be considered by the Government, the petitioners in both the writ petitions as well as the contesting respondents and the Manager will be heard and appropriate orders will be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Government while passing fresh orders in the matter will consider the claims of respective parties with regard to the dates on which their appointments have been made and the dates on which the vacancies have arisen. In W.P.(C) No.28676/2009, the petitioner has got a further complaint that she is not getting salary from 13.06.2008. Since the petitioner is having a valid approval as per Exhibit P1 from W.P.(C) Nos.24450 & 28676/2009 4 30.06.2005 to 08.06.2010, there cannot be any difficulty in disbursing the salary. Therefore, the Assistant Educational Officer, Ranni will see that the salary including arrears due to the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.28676/2009 in the said school is disbursed within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. These writ petitions are disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp