IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19453 of 2009(B)
1. JAMES E.J., U.P.S.A., ST.GEORGE'S HIGH
... Petitioner
2. BOBY THOMAS A.T., U.P.S.A.,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
3. CORPORATE MANAGER, CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL
For Petitioner :SRI.P.J.MATHEW
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :13/07/2009
O R D E R
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.19453 OF 2009
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of July, 2009.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners herein are working as Upper Primary School
Assistants under the 3rd respondent-Manager. The 1st petitioner
was appointed as U.P.S.A with effect from 02.07.2008 in a
regular vacancy which arose due to the promotion of Smt.Tessy
Sebastian, U.P.S.A as H.S.A. Exhibit P1 is the copy of the order
of appointment. The 2nd petitioner was appointed as U.P.S.A in
St.Mary’s High School, Marudomkara with effect from 26.06.2008
in a vacancy that arose due to promotion of Sr.Sheeba M.J.,
U.P.S.A as H.S.A (Natural Science). Exhibit P2 is the copy of the
order of appointment.
2. It is pointed out that the appointments of the respective
Teachers have already been approved. The endorsement in the
appointment orders shows that the approval have been granted
on daily wage basis from the respective dates of appointment till
March 2009. Presumably, the orders are passed in the light of
W.P.(C) No.19453/2009 2
Exhibit P3 Government Order, G.O.(P) No.104/2008/G.Edn dated
10.06.2008, which is under challenge in this writ petition.
3. The validity of Exhibit P3 Government Order was under
challenge in various writ petitions before this Court and a Division
Bench of this Court in Unni Narayanan vs. State of Kerala
(2009(2) KLT 604) has held in paragraph 7 that the offending
conditions in Exhibit P2 Government Order cannot stand with the
statutory rules. Therefore, for enforcing them, the relevant rules
require amendment. As long as the rules are not amended,
Exhibit P2 cannot be pressed into service by the Government.
4. Finally in paragraph 12, the following directions were
issued:
“In the case of the writ petitioners in these
cases, orders, if any passed, approving their
appointments on daily wage basis, relying on Ext.P2
Government Order are quashed. All appointments,
whether pending approval or already rejected, shall
be considered/reconsidered by the Educational
Officers concerned and fresh orders shall be passed
in the light of the declaration of law made by us in
W.P.(C) No.25176 of 2008. The salary found due to
be paid to the incumbents concerned shall be
released immediately. The action in this regard
W.P.(C) No.19453/2009 3
shall be completed within six weeks from the date
of production of a copy of this judgment”.
In the light of the above, Exhibits P1 and P2 to the extent to
which approval is given only on daily wage basis are quashed.
The District Educational Officer will pass fresh orders in the light
of the directions issued by the Division Bench above which will
govern this case also. Appropriate orders shall be passed within
a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. The petitioners will produce a copy of this judgment
along with copy of the judgment of the Division Bench referred to
above before the District Educational Officer for compliance.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
JUDGE
smp