IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2010 / 27TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 31330 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.NICY BABY, W/O.ABHILASH P.VARGHESE, AGED 29 YEARS, LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, N.L.P. SCHOOL, MANALY, KECHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUNNAMKULAM-680 503, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, N.L.P.SCHOOL, MANALY, KECHERY-680 501, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. SMT.PRAJEESH, LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT (NOT APPROVED), N.L.P.SCHOOL, MANALY, KECHERY-680 501, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY G.P.SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.31330 OF 2010 ------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was appointed as LPSA in NLP School, Manaly, Kechery, Thrissur District with effect from 5.6.2002. The appointment was approved by the Assistant Educational officer. It is stated that from 2006-07 onwards, the petitioner was accommodated against the anticipated additional division vacancies. While so, C.Vijayakumari, Headmistress of the School retired from service on 31.3.2010. The claim of the petitioner is that she ought to have been adjusted against the said vacancy from 1.6.2010 in the light of the Government Order dated 9.11.1999 and the decision in Geetha S. v. Jeo Thomas K and others (2009(4) KHC 296). Though the petitioner requested the Manager to appoint her against the vacancy from 1.6.2010, the Manager declined the request. On the other hand, the Manager appointed the 4th W.P.(C).No.31330 OF 2010 2 respondent, who according to the petitioner is a fresh hand. Aggrieved by the appointment of the 4th respondent, the petitioner filed Ext.P7 representation before the Assistant Educational Officer. 2. The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner in the Writ Petition are the following: “i) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner from 2006-07 onwards. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 3rd respondent to accommodate the petitioner as LPSA against the regular vacancy arose from 1.6.2010. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to effectively consider and pass appropriate orders upon Exhibit P-7 after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner within a time limit before granting approval to the 4th respondent. iv) pass such other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the circumstances of the case” 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the time being, it would be W.P.(C).No.31330 OF 2010 3 sufficient, if the Assistant Educational Officer is directed to consider Ext.P7 representation submitted by the petitioner, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, the Manager and the 4th respondent. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Assistant Educational Officer, Kunnamkulam to consider and dispose of Ext.P7 representation dated 24.9.2010 submitted by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, the Manager and the 4th respondent. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the Assistant Educational Officer. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms