IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 4TH OCTOBER 2010 / 12TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 16121 of 2006(T) PETITIONER: --------------- M. RAJALAXMY, TEACHER, G.L.P. SCHOOL, PARAPPUKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.N.KUTTAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, GENERAL, EDUCATION (B) DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. THE ADDL.DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION (ACADEMIC), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE MANAGER, A.U.P.SCHOOL, PARAPPUKKARA, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R5 BY ADV. SRI.K.PADMANABHAN GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.6.1997 ISSUED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.6.1998 ISSUED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.11.2003 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.2.2005 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.4.2006 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.1.1997 ISSUED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(Rt)NO.1169/94/GE DATED 30.3.1994. EXT.R5(b) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(Rt) NO.2311/98/GE DATED 16.6.1998. //TRUE COPY// AHZ/ K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C). NO. 16121 OF 2006 T ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was appointed as UPSA in A.U.P.School, Parappukkara for the period from 1.1.1997 to 26.3.1998, as per Ext.P6 order of appointment. The Assistant Educational Officer approved her appointment for the period from 1.1.1997 to 31.3.1997 only, in view of Rule 49 of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules. Rule 49 reads as follows: “49. Qualified teachers except Headmasters appointed in vacancies which are not permanent which extend over the summer vacation and who continue in such vacancies till the closing date shall be retained in the vacancies during the vacation, if their continuous service as on the closing day is not less than eight months. The teachers so retained shall be entitled to the vacation salary. These teachers shall be relieved on the closing day if their continuous service as on that day is less than the aforesaid period. This rule shall not apply to teacher appointed in training vacancies. Explanation:- For the purpose of this rule, 'Headmaster' includes Teacher-in-charge also.” W.P.(C) NO.16121 OF 2006 :: 2 :: 2. The appointment of the petitioner as per Ext.P6 appointment order was in a leave vacancy. In the same leave vacancy, the petitioner was appointed for the period from 2.6.1997 to 26.3.1998, as per Ext.P1 order of appointment. That appointment was approved by the Assistant Educational Officer for the period from 2.6.1997 to 31.12.1997. Meanwhile, the petitioner applied for maternity leave for the period from 1.1.1998 to 26.3.1998. The maternity leave applied for by the petitioner was rejected by the Assistant Educational Officer. The petitioner challenged the order of the Assistant Educational Officer before the District Educational Officer, who passed Ext.P3 order dated 15.11.2003. The District Educational Officer confirmed the order of the Assistant Educational Officer. The ground on which the maternity leave was rejected was that the appointment of the petitioner was for a period of less than one year and as per Note 4 to Rule 100 of Part I of the Kerala Service Rules, such a person who was appointed as a provisional hand was not entitled to get maternity leave. Note 4 to Rule 100 reads as follows: “Note 4:- Maternity leave under this rule and Rule 101 shall be admissible to provisional female recruits W.P.(C) NO.16121 OF 2006 :: 3 :: continuing in service beyond one year provided they would continue in service but for proceeding on such leave.” The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the order of the District Educational Officer before the Director of Public Instruction and the Government, who passed Exts.P4 and P5 orders respectively. 3. The petitioner was later appointed in another vacancy in the same School from 1.6.1998 onwards. Thereafter, she got employment in a Government School. The contention of the petitioner is that if maternity leave is granted and the service of the petitioner is regularized, she would get the benefit of her service for the continuous period. 4. The learned Government Pleader submitted that Exts.P3, P4 and P5 orders are perfectly legal and valid in view of Note 4 to Rule 100 of Part I of the Kerala Service Rules and the Division Bench decision of this Court in Dr.Daizy Philip v. The State of Kerala and others (ILR 1999(1) Kerala 619). W.P.(C) NO.16121 OF 2006 :: 4 :: 5. In view of the specific provision in Note 4 to Rule 100 Part I of the Kerala Service Rules and the decision of the Division Bench in Dr.Daizy Philip v. The State of Kerala and others (ILR 1999(1) Kerala 619), I do not think that Exts.P3, P4 and P5 orders can be successfully challenged by the petitioner. Going by the Rules, the petitioner was not entitled to get maternity leave applied for by her. I do not find any ground to interfere with Exts.P3, P4 and P5 orders. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/