IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2008 / 27TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24340 of 2008(V) PETITIONERS: 1. DINESH KUMAR K.P., HSA (HINDI), MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. ABHILASH KUMAR B., HSA (MATHEMATICS) MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. BINDU P.K., HSA (ENGLISH), MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. BUSHARA C., HSA (ENGLISH), MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. VINAYAN K., PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER, MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 6. RENJITHA V.K., HSA (ENGLISH), MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 7. SINDHU C.M., SEWING TEACHER, MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 8. SUMATHY M.P., HSA (MALAYALAM) MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 9. PRASEEDA V.V., HSA (MATHEMATICS), MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 10. SUMESH K.G., HSA (HINDI), MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 11. ANWAR SADATH P., HSA (SOCIAL STUDIES) MES HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.P.V.ASHA RESPONDENTS: 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD. 4. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD. 5. THE CORPORATE MANAGER, MES STATE SYLLABUS SCHOOLS, VALIYANGADI, PERINTHALMANNA. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 24340 OF 2008 V -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th August, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners, eleven in number, are working in M.E.S.Higher Secondary School, Mannarkkad, Palakkad District. Of the petitioners, majority of them are High School Assistants, while one is a Physical Education Teacher and another is a Sewing Teacher. 2. The School in which the petitioners are working is an aided school under the corporate management of the fifth respondent. The petitioners were appointed in 2002, 2003 and 2004. The orders of appointment are marked as Ext.P1 series. The appointments of the petitioners were duly approved by the educational officers. It is stated that all the petitioners have been drawing the pay and allowances attached to the posts concerned. 3. It would appear that the District Educational Officer returned the salary bill of the petitioners for the month of July, 2008, directing the teacher-in-charge to re-submit the same after excluding sixteen teachers. It would appear that such a stand was taken by the District Educational Officer in view of the audit objections raised by the Deputy Director of Education, referred to in Ext.P2 letter dated 28.7.2008. Ext.P3 letter W.P.(C) NO.24340 OF 2008 :: 2 :: dated 14.7.2008 was issued by the District Educational Officer, Palakkad to the Manager of the School, directing the latter to furnish reply within two days on receipt of the letter. It is stated in Ext.P3 that on failure to submit the reply, the case will be taken up with the Director of Public Instruction for cancellation of the approval of the appointment of the petitioners and others. The objection seems to be that at the time when the petitioners and similarly situated teachers were appointed in the newly opened school by the fifth respondent, no protected teacher was appointed. The case of the petitioners is that at the time of appointment of the petitioners no protected teachers were available in the District and no list of protected teachers was forwarded by the educational authorities to the Manager. 4. A statement is filed by the fourth respondent, wherein it is stated that objections have been raised in audit against sixteen teachers appointed by the Manager. It is stated in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the statement as follows: “3. Pursuant to the directions in the audit report of the Deputy Director (Education) Palakkad to get cancelled the approval of appointments, by the Director of Public Instruction, Thiruvananthapuram, this office has withheld the salary of 16 persons from 2007 -08 onwards. In other cases, the Deputy Director (Education) has not given directions to take up the matter with the Director of Public Instructions, Thiruvananthapuram for cancellation of approval of appointments. However, the nature of objections in all the cases appears to be one and the same. So, their salary will also be withheld from next month onwards. W.P.(C) NO.24340 OF 2008 :: 3 :: 4. The extract of objections were communicated to the Manager and his reply thereon obtained. In most cases, it is seen that the Manager had not fulfilled the conditions regarding the absorption of protected hands before making the appointments, as the school was one newly opened. So, this office has already addressed the Director of Public Instruction, Thiruvananthapuram with a request to cancel the approval of appointments as required in the audit report of the Deputy Director (Education), Palakkad. The extract of objections and reply received from the Manager are also enclosed Annexure A.” 5. Learned Government Pleader submits that the matter is now placed before the Director of Public Instruction, who will dispose of the matter after hearing all the affected teachers. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, for the present, the petitioners would be satisfied if, before taking any final decision in the matter, the Director of Public Instruction would afford them an effective opportunity of being heard. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that until a final decision is taken in the matter, the petitioners are entitled to get the salary and allowances payable to them. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Director of Public Instruction to hear the petitioners before taking any final decision in the matter of cancellation of the approval of the appointments of the petitioners. The petitioners shall W.P.(C) NO.24340 OF 2008 :: 4 :: be afforded an effective and meaningful opportunity of being heard and for making a representation. The representation as well as the submissions shall be considered by the Director of Public Instruction after perusing the relevant documents. Till a final decision is taken in the matter by the Director of Public Instruction, the salary and allowances payable to the petitioners shall be duly disbursed to them within time. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/