IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20988 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABDUL SALAM M., MANAGER, M.A.M. U.P. SCHOOL, ARAKKAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.S.KARTHIKA SRI.M.R.ANISON SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI SMT.K.B.VEENA SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT., GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASST. EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, VENGARA, MALAPPURAM. BY G.P. SHRI A.J. VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 20988 of 2009-P - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner is the Manager of M.A.M. U.P. School, Arakkal, Malappuram District. Ext.P1 is the staff fixation order for the year 2007- 2008. Based on the visit by the Super Check Cell, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the second respondent on 18.7.2008 proposing to reduce two divisions and to abolish two posts of Assistant Teachers and one post of L.G. Hindi. The petitioner filed a detailed objection to the show cause notice. A personal hearing was also proposed to be held on 30.8.2008, but it was adjourned indefinitely. Meanwhile, according to the petitioner, the third respondent without having any authority, revised the staff fixation order reducing two divisions and three posts. The salary of the staff working in the school have also been withheld. The petitioner thereafter approached this court by filing W.P.(C) No.26159/2008 and by Ext.P2 judgment, this court issued directions to the second respondent to take a decision in the matter, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment with a further direction to release the salary of the staff. wpc 20988/2009 2 3. Thereafter, the matter was finally heard and Ext.P3 is the order thus passed. Since the petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3, a revision petition has been filed as Ext.P4 before the first respondent, under Rule 92 of Chapter XIV-A K.E.R. The petitioner submits that in spite of the pendency of the revision petition, the staff fixation orders have been revised as per Ext.P5, for the year 2007-2008 and as per Ext.P6, for the year 2008-2009. The main prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the first respondent to take a decision on Ext.P4 within a time frame. 4. Heard learned Govt. Pleader appearing for the respondents. There will be a direction to the first respondent to take a decision on Ext.P4 after hearing the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/