IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2009 / 13TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 20115 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MANAGER, NATTIKA WEST KMUP SCHOOL, NATTIKA. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.GANGESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE A.E.O., VALAPPAD. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI MUHAMOOD T.T THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.20115/2009-H ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 5th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the Manager of an Aided school. He is aggrieved by the audit objections raised by the second respondent with regard to the shifting of certain U.P.S.As as L.P.S.As and L.P.S.As as U.P.S.As. The copy of the audit objection is produced as Ext.P1. The petitioner submitted Ext.P4 explanation in the matter. By Ext.P5 the objection was overruled, against which the writ petition has been filed. The petitioner has produced Ext.P6 Circular dated 26/06/2007 to contend that shifting of posts contrary to the Rules relating to qualifications prescribed under Chapter XXXI of K.E.R alone is prohibited. 2. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that redesignation is in conformity with the qualifications of the corresponding posts as prescribed in Rules 3 and 4 of Chapter XXXI K.E.R. The same has also been approved as per Ext.P3 by the Assistant Educational Officer. It is therefore submitted that the objection taken by the Audit cannot be supported. W.P.(C). No.20115/2009 -:2:- 3. The second respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The stand taken therein is that the action of the Manager is against G.O.(P). No.188/2000/G.Edn., dated 08/06/2000 and Lr.No.35528/J3/04/G.Edn., dated 11/10/2004. It is further stated in paragraph (7) of the counter affidavit that the pensionary benefits of the Headmistress who retired on 31/03/2009 has already been sanctioned by the said respondent and the same has been authorised by the Accountant General. 4. Therefore, the question is whether the objection raised by the audit can be justified. It is clear from the proceedings issued by the Manager which was approved as per Ext.P3 that the shifting has been effected in terms of the qualifications of respective teachers. It is therefore clear that there was nothing illegal so as to raise objection against the same in the audit. The relevant Rules 3 and 4 of the Chapter XXXI K.E.R providing for the qualifications of teachers is also rightly relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Ext.P6 will further indicate that shifting of posts contrary to rules relating to qualification prescribed under Chapter XXXI of K.E.R alone is prohibited. Hence the action taken by the petitioner cannot be held to be illegal and contrary to rules. In that view of the matter, Ext.P5 cannot be sustained and the same is quashed. W.P.(C). No.20115/2009 -:3:- 5. What remains is sanctioning of increments of respective teachers. There will be a direction to the second respondent to take appropriate action to sanction eligible increments due to the six teachers and appropriate orders shall be passed within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. The writ petition is allowed as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms