IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18906 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SHYJA E.S., D/O. E.K.SEELAN, EDURAYIL HOUSE, MULLASSERY P.O., PIN-680 509, THRISSUR DISTRICT, L.P.S.A., HINDU U.P.SCHOOL, MULLASSERY. 2. PRAVEEN N.K., NADUVIL PURAKKAL HOUSE, MULLASSERY P.O., PIN-680 509, THRISSUR DISTRICT, U.P.S.A., HINDU U.P.SCHOOL, MULLASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.JIJO PAUL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 3. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MULLASSERY. 4. THE MANAGER, HINDU U.P.SCHOOL, MULLASSERY. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.18906/2009-G ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 7th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners herein were appointed as leave substitutes in the post of Lower Primary School Assistant and Upper Primary School Assistant respectively in the Hindu U.P.School, Mullassery managed by the fourth respondent. They were appointed in long leave vacancies. But their appointments were approved only on daily wage basis by the third respondent. The orders of appointment are produced as Exts.P2 and P4. 2. Their appointments are from 03/06/2008 to 31/05/2012 and from 03/06/2008 to 18/03/2013. Exts.P3 and P5 are produced to show that the leave has been sanctioned to the concerned teachers properly by the Government. 3. The petitioners challenge Ext.P1 Government Order relying upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Unni Narayanan v. State of Kerala (2009 (2) KLT 604). The effect and validity of the above G.O was considered therein and 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 W.P.(C). No.18906/2009 -:2:- more, appointment can be made to fill up the same. The term of appointment need not be co-terminus 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 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, Exts.P2 and P4 to the extent to which approval is given only on daily wages basis are quashed. The Assistant 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 W.P.(C). No.18906/2009 -:3:- petitioners will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Division Bench judgment referred to above, before the third respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms