IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 10TH OCTOBER 2011 / 18TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25685 of 2011(I) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- GIRIJA.T.G, TEACHER (STATISTICS), GOVERNMENT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MARAYOOR, SAHAYAGIRI P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.VELLAYANI SUNDARARAJU SMT.P.MEENAKUMARI RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPT., GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 3. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, IDUKKI, THODUPUZHA, PIN-685 534. BY SRI. V. VIJULAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.25685/2011 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF NO.A1/21961/90 DATED 7.11.1990 OF 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.AD.B5/23655/06 HSE DATED 17.11.2006 OF 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF THE SENIORITY LIST OF HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANTS ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER NO.SY.(1) 69394/06/DPI DATED 13.2.2009. EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR OF 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE NO. D6/83373/10/DPI DATED 14.12.2010. EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF GAZETTE NOTIFICAION VIDE NO. D6/83374/2010/DPI DATED 7.6.2011. EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26.8.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.25685 OF 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner who is working as Higher Secondary School Teacher (Statistics) is aggrieved by non inclusion of her name in Ext.P5 select list for promotion. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that from 24.11.2006 onwards, the petitioner has been working as Higher Secondary School Teacher and the next promotion is to the posts of Head of Schools/Training Schools as well as Assistant Educational Officers. In the year 2011-2012, there existed more than 500 vacancies in all the above three categories. Ext.P3 is the relevant pages of the seniority list of High School Assistants from 01.01.1986 to 31.12.1990 and the rank assigned to the petitioner is 1036 in Sl.No.380. 3. After various guidelines were issued for sending the confidential reports, the confidential report of the petitioner was also duly sent to the 4th respondent and finally to the 2nd W.P.(C) No.25685/2011 2 respondent after properly reviewing the same. The reason stated in Ext.P5 at page 34 of the writ petition is that the confidential reports of various teachers including the petitioner were reviewed by the Deputy Director of Education instead of Regional Deputy Director. The petitioner has filed a detailed representation as per Ext.P6 before the Government through proper channel challenging the non-inclusion of her name. 4. Learned Government Pleader on getting instructions from the Director of Public Instructions submitted that as far as the confidential report of the petitioner is concerned, it was reviewed by the Deputy Director of Education. Ext.P5 is dated 07.06.2011. Subsequently, the report from the Regional Deputy Director reviewing the confidential reports was received as per letter dated 24.07.2011 but the same was also defective. It is further pointed out that rank No. upto 830 of 1986-1990 list were only promoted as Headmistress/Assistant Educational Officer. Accordingly, it is suggested that the petitioner has sufficient time to produce the revised confidential report after clearing the objections. W.P.(C) No.25685/2011 3 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the reason stated for not considering the name of the petitioner for promotion is not correct and the contention that only rank No. upto 830 was considered is also not correct. It is submitted that 27 persons who are below the seniority assigned to the petitioner have been considered. I am not pronouncing finally on the issue since Ext.P6 representation is a statutory representation which will have to be considered by the authority concerned. There will be a direction to the Government to pass orders on Ext.P6 after hearing the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will forward a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition for compliance. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp