IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 OP.No. 32095 of 2002(U) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- HELNEY THOMAS, LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, AYSHA LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL, CHEDIKULAM, P.O. ARALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY MR.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. SMT.SARITHA DAVID CHUNKATH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION (P) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, IRITTY P.O. IRITTY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, AYSHA LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL, CHEDIKULAM P.O., ARALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. USHAKUMARI, ASSISTANT TEACHER, AYSHA L.P. SCHOOL, CHEDIKULAM P.O., ASRALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 5. VAKKACHAN PURAPUSHA, ASSISTANT TEACHER AYSHA L.P. SCHOOL, CHEDIKULAM P.O., ARALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 6. MERCY. K.M., ASSISTANT TEACHER AYSHA L.P SCHOOL, CHEDIKULAM P.O., ARALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R. SREELATHA. R4 TO R6 BY ADV. MR.N.RAGHURAJ, SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P. NO. 32095/2002-U ORDER ON CMP.NO.54309/2002 IN O.P. NO. 32095/2002 DISMISSED 28/10/2009 SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25/10/1999 IN O.P. NO. 14847/1995. EXT.P1(a): COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11/06/1997 IN CMP NO.16996/97 IN O.P. NO. 14847/1995. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O. (RT)NO.976/2001/GED DATED 14/03/2001 ISSUED BY R1. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27/10/2001 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R1. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(RT).2791/02/GED DATED 26/08/2002 ISSUED BY R1. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(MS)NO.323/97/G.EDN. DATED 18/08/1997 BY THE GOVT. OF KERALA. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- O.P. No.32095 OF 2002 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the direction issued in Exhibit P4 to the effect that the petitioner's claim for appointment will be considered after absorbing all the protected teachers. The Assistant Educational Officer was directed to ensure that the petitioner is taken up first. The challenge is in respect of the above said direction issued by the Government. 2. The petitioner was appointed initially in a leave vacancy as Lower Primary School Assistant on 14.09.1992 and again on 04.01.1993. She was appointed in a regular vacancy from 07.06.1993 onwards. When she was faced with termination, she approached this Court and filed O.P.No.14847/1995 and she continued on the basis of the interim order. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that if any appointments have been made in the meanwhile, that cannot be recognized. Exhibit P2 is the order by which the appointments O.P. No.32095/2002 2 of the petitioner have been approved for the period from 14.09.1992 and in the regular vacancy from 07.06.1993. 4. In Exhibit P4, it is stated that the appointments of the petitioner in leave vacancies for two different periods and from 07.06.1993 in a regular permanent vacancy were not approved by the Department pending settlement of certain issues connected with the appointments of TCH Holders. It is at that point of time, the Manager terminated her from service, which was stayed by this Court. Even after the disposal of the original petition, her appointment was not approved. The appointments made by the Manager were approved by different orders. The Government was therefore, of the view that as the petitioner was out of service from 11.09.1995 and as there is no vacancy to provide the petitioner at present, the request of the petitioner will be considered after absorbing all the protected teachers. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that now there are no protected teachers awaiting absorption and the petitioner can be considered for appointment in any fresh vacancy. O.P. No.32095/2002 3 If the petitioner files an appropriate representation before the 2nd respondent seeking for appointment in any existing vacancy, the 2nd respondent will consider the same and issue appropriate directions to the Manager without further delay. This original petition is accordingly disposed of. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp