IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2011 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 16486 of 2011(I) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- THE SECRETARY, CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, DIOCESE OF KOTHAMANGALAM, KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691. BY ADV. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNANTHANAM, SR.ADVOCATE SRI.TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 01. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM- 682035. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01. 4. THE HEADMISTRESS, ST. LITTLE TERESA'S H.S., VAZHAKULAM, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 626. BY SMT. NISHA BOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.16486/2011 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD. 7.4.11 IN WP(C) 5261/10-G OF THIS COURT. EXT. P2 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD. 8.10.09 IN WP(C)17927/09 OF THIS COURT. EXT. P3 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD. 21.5.10 IN W.A.672/10 OF THIS COURT. EXT. P4 : COPY OF STAFF FIXATION ORDER DTD. 21.2.11 OF DIST.EDL.OFFICER,MUVATTUPUZHA. EXT. P5 : COPY OF APPEAL DTD. 26.2.11. FROM PETITIONER TO R3. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16486 OF 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of June, 2011. J U D G M E N T The matter involved is the dispute regarding staff fixation order for the year 2010-11. The petitioner is the Secretary of the Corporate Educational Agency. 2. It is pointed out that the staff fixation order Ext.P4 was not on the basis of the student strength on the 6th working day but based on the physical student strength on the date of higher level verification done by the 2nd respondent in December 2010. The petitioner finally contends that in the light of Ext.P1 judgment of this Court, the said approach cannot be justified. It is also pointed out that the number of boys students also should have been accounted for and in support of the same, Exts.P2 and P3 judgments are relied upon. I am not expressing anything on the merits of the matter since the issue will have to be considered by the 3rd respondent before whom Ext.P5 appeal has been filed. There will be a W.P.(C) No.16486/2011 2 direction to the 3rd respondent to take a decision on Ext.P5, after hearing the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is open to the petitioner to rely on the judgments Exts.P1 to P3 and it is also open to him to produce any additional materials. 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