IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26315 of 2008(G) PETITIONER: C.T. MUHAMMED, S/O. ABDULLA, AGED 49 YEARS, FULL-TIME URDU TEACHER, PULIYANAMBRAM MUSLIM U.P.SCHOOL, P.O.PULIYANAMBRAM, (VIA) PERINGATHUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENTS: 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM, 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM - 14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR P.O., KANNUR - 2 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KANNUR P.O., KANNUR - 2. 5. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHOKLI, KNANNUR DISTRICT. 6. THE MANAGER, PULIYANAMBRAM MUSLIM U.P.SCHOOL, P.O. PULIYANAMBRAM, (VIA) PERINGATHUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. 7. SRI.M.DEVADASAN, TEACHER - IN-CHARGE, PULIYANAMBRAM BUSLIM U.P.SCHOOL, P.O.PULIYANAMBRAM, (VIA) PERINGATHUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MUHAMMED THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 26315 OF 2008 G -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st September, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner states that he is working as Full Time Urdu Teacher in Puliyanambram Muslim Upper Primary School. He commenced his service as Part Time Urdu Teacher on 12.7.1979. He states that with effect from 15.7.1980, he became Full Time Urdu Teacher by Group 'C' diversion. The full time post was sanctioned by Group 'C' diversion as per the Staff Fixation Order, states the petitioner. Ext.P2 is the appointment order appointing the petitioner as Full Time Urdu Teacher. It is stated that the petitioner acquired BA in Islamic History and Urdu and also B.Ed. in Social Studies in the year 1992. He has passed the departmental test for promotion as Headmaster in 2005. The petitioner also states that the seventh respondent commenced the continuous service only on 1.6.1981. 2. A vacancy of Headmaster arose in the School with effect from 1.5.2008 due to the retirement of C.K.Leela. Petitioner claims that he is the senior-most qualified teacher as on the date of occurrence of the vacancy and that he was entitled to be appointed as Headmaster. But, the Manager has appointed the seventh respondent as the teacher-in- W.P.(C) NO.26315 OF 2008 :: 2 :: charge. It is stated that the Manager has forwarded the proposal for approval of the appointment of the seventh respondent to the educational officer. 3. Petitioner has submitted Ext.P6 representation dated 22.7.2008, to the Assistant Educational Officer, Chokli, complaining that instead of appointing the petitioner, the Manager has illegally given the charge of Headmaster to the seventh respondent. Appropriate action in the matter is sought at the instance of the Assistant Educational Officer, in the representation submitted by the petitioner. Ext.P6 representation is pending disposal. 4. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following: “a) declare that the Petitioner is entitled to get appointment and approval thereof in preference to the appointment of the 7th Respondent. b) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 6th Respondent Manager of Puliyanambram Muslim U.P.School to appoint the Petitioner as Headmaster with effect from 1.5.2008 with all monetary benefits. c) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 5th Respondent to effectively consider and pass appropriate orders upon Exhibit P6 after affording an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner within a time limit and in the meantime refrain from approving the appointment of the 7th Respondent as Headmaster. W.P.(C) NO.26315 OF 2008 :: 3 :: d) Pass such other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the circumstances of the case.” 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, for the present, the petitioner would be satisfied if relief (c) is granted. For the purpose of granting relief (c), I do not think that it is necessary to issue notice to respondents Nos.6 and 7 and their interests would be safeguarded by directing the Assistant Educational Officer to hear them before passing any order on Ext.P6 representation. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: (i) The Assistant Educational Officer, Chokli (Respondent No.5) shall consider Ext.P6 representation and dispose of the same on the merits, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and respondents Nos.6 and 7 (The Manager and Sri.M.Devadasan) and any other person who is likely to be affected, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of two months. (ii) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the Assistant Educational Officer, Chokli. W.P.(C) NO.26315 OF 2008 :: 4 :: (iii) Petitioner shall send a copy of the judgment by registered post to respondents Nos.6 and 7 separately and shall produce proof of the same before the Assistant Educational Officer. (iv) It is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim put forward by the petitioner. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/