IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2008 / 10TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19675 of 2008(P) PETITIONER: ------------ MARCIA COLLIN NORONHA, HSA (ENGLISH) CCPLM ANGLO INDIAN HIGH SCHOOL, PERUMANOOR, ERNAKULAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 5. THE MANAGER, CCPLM ANGLO INDIAN HIGH SCHOOL, PERUMANOOR, ERNAKULAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MUHAMMED. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 19675 OF 2008 P -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st July, 2008 JUDGMENT In the manner in which I propose to dispose of the Writ Petition, I do not think that it is necessary to issue notice to the fifth respondent Manager. Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 to 4. 2. The averments in the Writ Petition would reveal the following facts: Smt.Carol Subreena Beveira, who was working as HSA in C.C.P.L.M. Anglo Indian High School, Perumannoor, availed leave without allowance for a period of five years from 1.8.2005 to 31.7.2010. The leave was sanctioned by the Government. In the said leave vacancy, Smt.Beena.A was appointed. The appointment of Beena.A was duly approved by the educational authorities. While Beena.A was working continuously in the leave vacancy, a permanent substantive vacancy of HSA (English) arose in the School consequent to the death of Mavis Rodrigues. It is stated that Beena.A was shifted to that permanent vacancy with effect from 17.8.2006 and that the petitioner was appointed as against the leave vacancy. Ext.P2 is the appointment order by which the petitioner was appointed. The District Educational Officer did not grant approval of the appointment of the petitioner. Ext.P3 order dated 2.2.2007 was passed by the District Educational Officer declining approval on the ground that the Manager did not appoint any protected teacher. W.P.(C) NO.19675 OF 2008 :: 2 :: The Manager filed appeal challenging Ext.P3 order before the Deputy Director of Education, which was dismissed as per Ext.P5 order dated 17.7.2007. Against Ext.P5 order, the Manager has filed Revision before the Director of Public Instructions. The Director of Public Instructions rejected the Revision as per Ext.P9 order dated 25.2.2008. Challenging Ext.P9 order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P10 Revision before the Government. Ext.P10 Revision is pending disposal. 3. It is stated in the Writ Petition that there are no eligible protected HSA (English) hands in Ernakulam District. The petitioner relies on Ext.P7 certificate dated 8.1.2007, issued by the Deputy Director of Education, indicating that in 2006-07, there are no protected teachers in HSA (English) in Ernakulam District. The contention of the petitioner is that her appointment should have been approved, since there was no protected teacher to be appointed in the School. 4. Ext.P10 is pending before the Government. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner confines her relief to a direction to dispose of Ext.P10 Revision expeditiously, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Learned Government Pleader submits that the Government will dispose of Ext.P10 Revision without much delay. W.P.(C) NO.19675 OF 2008 :: 3 :: In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner: a) The first respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P10 Revision, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, the Manager and the affected parties, if any, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. b) The petitioner shall send a copy of the judgment to the fifth respondent Manager by registered post and shall produce proof of the same before the first respondent. c) The petitioner shall produce certified copy of the judgment and copy of the Writ Petition before the first respondent. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/