IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2010 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 16314 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JASMIN Y W/O. HAMEED RAJA, LOWER GRADE URUDU TEACHER (PART TIME) CA HIGH SCHOOL, P.O COYALMANNAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. NOW RESIDING AT RAJA MANZIL, KERALA PARAMBU P.O VANUR, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD. 3. THE MANAGER CA HIGH SCHOOL, P.O COYALMANNAM, PALAKKAD DISRICT. 4. THE HEADMISTRESS CA HIGH SCHOOL, P.O COYALMANNAM, PALAKKAD DISRICT. 5. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.DILIP MOHAN R1,R2, R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.16314 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was appointed as Lower Grade Urdu Teacher (Part Time) in CA High School, Coyalmannam in Palakkad District as per Ext.P1 order. The said appointment was approved on 20.2.2006 with effect from 3.10.2005. Now, the petitioner is facing retrenchment pursuant to Ext.P4 staff fixation order for the year 2009-'10. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P5 petition before the Deputy Director of Education, Palakkad. Ext.P5 petition was dismissed by the Deputy Director of Education as per Ext.P6 order dated 30.3.2010. On being aggrieved by Ext.P6, the petitioner preferred Ext.P7 revision petition before the first respondent. The said revision petition is still pending. 2. The main contention of the petitioner is that he is not liable to be retrenched and in fact, the post of Lower Grade Urdu Teacher (Part Time) should not have been abolished as per Ext.P4. It is submitted that while issuing Ext.P4 staff fixation order, the second respondent had failed W.P.(C) NO.16314/2010 2 to take into consideration the provisions under Rule 6C of Chapter XXIII of the Kerala Education Rules. That apart, it is contented that based on the decision of this Court reported in 1983 KLT 278, Ext.P4 is liable to be interfered with. In fact, those are matters which are to be looked into by the first respondent while considering Ext.P7 revision petition. Yet another contention raised by the petitioner is that so long as six pupils are available for learning Urdu the said post of Lower Grade Urdu Teacher (Part Time) could not have been abolished as per Ext.P4 as Urdu was introduced in the school in the year 2005. In fact, the petitioner has also raised all the aforesaid contentions in Ext.P7 and these are issues that require serious consideration by the first respondent. The petitioner was on leave for doing her Diploma in Legal Education. She could not re-join duty only in the light of Ext.P4. In view of the fact that the contentions based on Rule 6C of Chapter XXIII of KER and also the decision of this Court reported in 1983 KLT 278 were not so far been looked into by the authorities, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 revision petition after considering all the aforesaid aspects expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the W.P.(C) NO.16314/2010 3 date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.16314/2010 4 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C). NO.16314 /2010 JUDGMENT 27th May, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.16314/2010 5