IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2009 / 30TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 23999 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MOOSAKUTTY PUTHUVALAPPAN, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, AIDED HIGH SCHOOL- PAREL MAMPATTUMOOLA, P.O.KOORAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI MUHAMOOD T.T. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.23999/2009-T ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 21st day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was appointed by the Manager as an U.P.S.A in an Aided High School, Parel Mampattumoola on 20/11/2006 in a regular vacancy which arose due to the promotion of one Smt.K.Sreekala as H.S.A. Ext.P1 is the copy of the order. Presently, the petitioner is aggrieved by the stipulation in the order of granting approval, Ext.P4. For the period from 20/11/2006 to 31/05/2007, approval is granted only on daily wage basis as per G.O.(P).No.104/08/G.Edn., dated 10/06/2008. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Unni Narayanan v. State of Kerala (2009 (2) KLT 604), the said stipulation cannot be sustained. 3. In the above judgment it was held that without amending the statutory rules, a Government Order cannot be pressed into service. It was held that “if the vacancy is having a duration of one academic year or more, appointment can be made to fill up the same. The term of appointment need not be co-terminous with the term of the vacancy. If, in fact, the vacancy is having a duration of one academic year or more, even if, there is some delay in making the appointment, such appointment will have to be W.P.(C). No.23999/2009 -:2:- approved.” Ultimately, in para 12, a direction was issued as follows: “12. In the case of the writ petitioners in these cases, orders, if any passed, approving their appointments on daily wage basis, relying on Ext.P2 Government Order are quashed. All appointments, whether pending approval or already rejected, shall be considered/reconsidered by the Educational Officers concerned and fresh orders shall be passed in the light of the declaration of law made by us in W.P.(C) No.25176 of 2008. The salary found due to be paid to the incumbents concerned shall be released immediately. The action in this regard shall be completed within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.” 4. In the light of the above, Ext.P4 as far as it limits the approval for the period from 20/11/2006 to 31/05/2007 on daily wages basis, is set aside. The District Educational Officer will pass fresh orders in the light of the findings rendered by the Division Bench in the above decision, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Division Bench judgment referred to above, before the authority concerned for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms