IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2011 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 32833 of 2008(H) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SREEDHARAN.P, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.CHANDU NAIR, 'SREKARTHIKA' IRAVIKULAM P.O. PRESENTLY WORKING AS URDU TEACHER ,G.B.U.P.S, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD. BY ADVS. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR, SMT.P.A.ANITHA. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE HEADMASTER, G.B.U.P.S.,KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD. 4. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R2 TO R4 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2011 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.16766OF 2010 AND WPC.NO.19689 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.32833/2008 H APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD. 15/04/08. P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 13/05/08 IN WP(C) NO.14619/08. P3: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 13/08/08. P4: NIL P5: COPY OF THE LETTER OF HEADMASTER G.B.U.P.SCHOOL COYALMANNAM DTD. 09/06/08. P6: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 03/06/08 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). Nos.32833/2008-H, 19689/2009-E & 16766/2010-U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 8th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T These writ petitions are filed by the same petitioner. It is a case where the petitioner's deployment by the Deputy Director of Education, Palakkad was challenged by him before this Court in W.P.(C).No.14619/2008 whereby the Director of Public Instruction was directed to consider the matter in the light of Ext.P5 representation produced therein. It was further directed therein that till orders are passed on Ext.P5, deployment of the petitioner to G.U.P.S, Bhimanad as per Ext.P1 produced therein shall stand stayed. A copy of the said Judgment is produced as Ext.P2 in W.P.(C).No.32833/2008. 2. The present controversy is with regard to the regularisation of the period subsequent to the date of deployment till he was reposted in the former school. By Ext.P6 in W.P.(C).No.19689/2009, the petitioner was directed by the Deputy Director of Education, to apply W.P.(C). Nos.32833/2008, 19689/2009 & 16766/2010 -:2:- for leave without allowance for the period from 15/04/2008 to 28/08/2008. 3. The facts of the case show that he was working as Junior Urdu Teacher in G.B.U.P.S., Kuzhalmannam. Initially, he joined service in the Kuthanoor High School on 03/12/1981. On 11/10/2005, he was deployed as a protected teacher in G.U.P.S., Vadasserypuram and in December 1997, he was deployed to G.B.U.P.S, Kuzhalmannam and he continued there till 09/04/2008. He was posted to G.U.P.S., Bhimanad in Mannarkad Sub Educational District by order dated 28/03/2008 of the third respondent-Deputy Director of Education in W.P. (C).No.32833/2008. According to the petitioner, the said order was passed after retaining one Smt.K.S.Latha who was junior to the petitioner. The above dispute had led to the filing of the earlier writ petition, as already noted, which was disposed of by Ext.P2 Judgment produced in W.P.(C).No.32833/2008. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had produced the copy of the Judgment without any delay and evidently, the delay in passing the order, as directed W.P.(C). Nos.32833/2008, 19689/2009 & 16766/2010 -:3:- by this Court in Ext.P2 Judgment [produced in W.P.(C). No.32833/2008], has resulted in the present scenario. My attention was invited to Ext.P9 (produced in 19689/2009) a copy of the affidavit filed by the Director of Public Instruction in Contempt of Court Case No.1107/2008. The said Contempt Case was filed by the petitioner for non compliance of the directions in Ext.P2 Judgment [produced in W.P.(C).No.32833/2008]. Therein, after referring to the consequential orders passed by the Director of Public Instruction, the delay has been explained in paragraph (3) of the affidavit. It is explained that even though hearing was conducted on 11/06/2008, as it took time to complete the official formalities, Annexure R2(a) order could be issued only on 22/07/2008. It is also mentioned that the delay was caused only due to administrative reasons beyond the control of the Director of Public Instruction. 4. Therefore, the learned counsel is well founded in submitting that the petitioner cannot be held liable for any administrative delay. Even though, the direction is to submit a leave application as per W.P.(C). Nos.32833/2008, 19689/2009 & 16766/2010 -:4:- Ext.P6 and as no other leave is available in his credit, and if an application for leave without allowance is submitted then that may cause adverse consequences to the petitioner. Evidently, it is a case where the redeployment was stayed by this Court as evident from Ext.P2 Judgment produced in W.P.(C). No.32833/2008. 5. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that even before the deployment was withheld, he was relieved from duty on 15/04/2008. Evidently, that was during the vacation. Apart from that, Ext.P2 Judgment wherein the order deploying him was stayed became final. 6. As the deployment itself was stayed by this Court, evidently, it is as if the petitioner was never deployed. He was also ordered to be redeployed by the order Ext.P4 produced in W.P.(C).No.19689/2009 passed by the Director of Public Instruction. In that view of the matter, the disputed period i.e from 15/04/2008 to 28/08/2008 is liable to be regularised. But the same will be done without any obligation to disburse salary W.P.(C). Nos.32833/2008, 19689/2009 & 16766/2010 -:5:- for the said period. He will only be entitled for payment of increment and festival allowance. Appropriate orders will be passed by the Deputy Director of Education, Palakkad who is the first respondent in W.P.(C).No.19689/2009. 7. Therefore, W.P.(C). Nos.32833/2008 and 19689/2009 are allowed. Ext.P6 in W.P.(C). No.19689/2009 is quashed. There will be a direction to the first respondent in W.P.(C). No.19689/2009 to pass appropriate orders regularising the service of the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Consequently, there will be a revision of retirement benefits of the petitioner also and the monetary benefits will be disbursed within a further period of two months. 8. W.P.(C). No.16766/2010 is also closed in the light of the above. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms