IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 18708 of 2009(G)
1. SHEEBA JACOB, W/O. GEORGE MAMMEN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY
... Respondent
2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, OFFICE
3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION)
4. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE
5. MANAGER, ST. JOHN'S HIGHER SECONDARY
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :03/07/2009
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No. 18708 of 2009-G
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2009.
JUDGMENT
The main prayer in the writ petition is to quash Exts.P9 to P13 orders
issued by respondents 2 and 4 respectively and for a direction to the first
respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P14 statutory revision.
2. The petitioner herein was working as H.S.A. (Maths), but was
reverted as UPSA, as per Ext.P1 staff fixation order. Ext.P3 is the revised
staff fixation order which was passed in accordance with Ext.P2 Govt.
Order. The petitioner’s case appears to be that even though she was
reverted, one of her juniors, Smt.C.M. Achamma was retained as H.S.A.
applying 1 : 40 ratio. The petitioner asserts that the principle contained in
Rule 51 of Chapter XIV-A K.E.R. was not adhered to by the respondents.
The Manager had approached the third respondent and later the second
respondent, by filing statutory appeals. Petitioner had filed a revision
challenging it. Ext.P9 is the order passed by the second respondent and
Ext.P13 is the consequent order passed by the District Educational Officer.
In these orders, the alleged defects in the staff fixation order for the year
2005-06 was directed to be rectified. In view of the orders Exts.P9 and
18708/2009 2
P13, the petitioner is facing recovery of salary paid.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Govt.
Pleader.
3. In the light of the fact that Ext.P14 is pending which has been
filed before the Government and as the petitioner seeks for a direction to
dispose of the same expeditiously as she is facing recovery, there will be a
direction to the first respondent to take a decision on Ext.P14 after hearing
the petitioner and the Manager, within a period of three months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Pending disposal of Ext.P14
revision petition, any recovery proceedings sought for against the petitioner
will be kept in abeyance. The petitioner will produce a copy of the writ
petition along with a copy of this judgment before the first respondent for
compliance.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/