IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2011 / 22ND ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 2025 of 2007(N) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ R.V.JAYADEVI, W/O.ANIL LAL, AGED 28 YEARS, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (PHYSICAL SCIENCE), P.H.M.K.M.V.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PANAVOOR, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVADRUM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ATTINGAL, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 5. THE MANAGER, P.H.M.K.M.V.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PANAVOOR, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.2025/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B4/8709/02/K.DIS OF THE DIST.EDL.OFFICER, DATED 03/01/2003. P2 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D.DIS.29928/03/RA(1)/DPI OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT, DATED 04/04/2003. P3 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B4/32971/02/D.DIS. OF THE DY. DIRECTOR OF EDN, DATED 19/03/2003. P4 COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.4940/04/GI.EDN. OF THE GOVERNMENT, DATED 19/11/2004. P5 COPY OF THE G.O.(RT)NO.2024/06/GI.EDN. OF THE GOVERNMENT, DATED 18/05/2006. P6 COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2003 (2) K.L.T.182, DATED 16/11/2002. P7 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.12222 OF 2007-E, DATED 30/10/2007. P8 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.2787 OF 2007, DATED 22/09/2009. P9 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.7207 OF 2005-G, DATED 16/07/2009. P10 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.35436 OF 2002-R, DATED 03/02/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 2025 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 13th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was appointed as a HSA (Physical Science) in the 5th respondent's aided school on 21.10.2002. That appointment was not approved. Later on, the petitioner was accommodated in another vacancy. The petitioner is now aggrieved by the orders, whereby the approval for his appointment with effect from 21.10.2002 was rejected. Exts. P1 to P5 orders are the impugned orders in that regard. The petitioner challenges the same. According to the petitioner, at the relevant time, there was a place for the petitioner and the petitioner's claim for accommodation in one of the vacancies available was rejected on a wrong interpretation of the decisions of this court in Suguna Prakash v. State of Kerala, 2002(3) KLT 488 and Baiju v. Suguna Prakash, 2003(2) KLT 182. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. Ext. P5 order of the Government contains all the relevant facts, which reads as follows: “Smt. Jayadevi was appointed as HSA (PS) on 21.10.02 against a vacancy due to the death Smt. Komalavally Amma, HSA (PS). The District Educational Officer rejected the approval for the reason that Smt. O. Jaya HSA (Maths) had to be retained in that vacancy. As authorised, the petitioner had been heard by the undersigned. During 2001-02, there existed 18 divisions and 18 HSAs (core subject) as shown below: PS NS Maths SS Total 4 2 6 6 18 W.P(C) No. 2025 of 2007 -: 2 :- There were 4 sanctioned posts of PS. The senior most teacher expired on 22.8.02 and Smt. R. Jayadevi was appointed as HSA (PS) on 21.10.02. During 2002-03, due to division fall, 2 HSAs were reduced and the total number became 16, as shown below:- PS NS Maths SS Eng Total 3 2 4 4 3 16 Smt. O. Jaya, HSA (Maths) who had continuous service from 5.6.95 and Smt. Deepa. L.B. HSA (SS) who had continuous service from 1.8.97 become excess. Hence Smt. O. Jaya HSA (Maths) was accommodated against HSA (PS) (the death vacancy of Smt. Komalavally Amma). Smt. Deepa L.B., who was not eligible for protection was retrenched in accordance with the Government orders then in force. But, later, Smt. Deepa was accommodated applying 1:40 ratio – vide G.O(Rt) 3160/05/Gl. Edn. dated 25.6.05. The District Educational Officer has reported that the total periods for 16 divisions for PS is 59. Three PS hands are sufficient for holding 69 periods. The matter was examined earlier and found that the case of Smt. Jayadevi had no merits. Since the total number of posts was reduced to 16, there were only three sanctioned posts of HSAs (PS). There was no post to accommodate the petitioner. So Government find no reason to deviate from the earlier stand. The request to approve the appointment is therefore rejected.” The same shows that it is not on any interpretation of the decisions that the petitioner's claim was rejected but on the ground that in order to accommodate a better claimant Smt. O. Jaya, HSA (Maths), the petitioner had to be avoided. Admittedly, at the relevant time, there were only 16 HSA posts in the core subjects. The petitioner is a Physical Science Teacher. There were only 3 Physical Science Teachers. The petitioner had to give way for the Maths W.P(C) No. 2025 of 2007 -: 3 :- Teacher Smt. O. Jaya. That had nothing to do with implementation of G.O(P) No. 11/02/G.Edn. dated 7.1.2002 forming a new category of English teachers in aided schools, which was the subject matter of the 2 decisions referred to by the petitioner. Going by Ext. P5 order, if the petitioner was to be retained, then Smt. O. Jaya would have to be sent out. The petitioner has not chosen to implead Smt. O. Jaya in this writ petition. Without her on the party array, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/