High Court Kerala High Court

Girish M.P. vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 12 December, 2008

Kerala High Court
Girish M.P. vs The Deputy Director Of Education on 12 December, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 1077 of 2008(C)


1. GIRISH M.P., PEON,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SATHEESH SUNNY K., LOWER DIVISION CLERK,

                        Vs



1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,

3. STATE OF KERALA,

4. THE DISTRICT OFFICER,

5. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,

6. SHRI.LINEESH.C., HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT,

                For Petitioner  :DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM

                For Respondent  :SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :12/12/2008

 O R D E R
                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                    --------------------------
                       W.P.(C) No.1077 of 2008
             -------------------------------------
             Dated this the 12th day of December, 2008

                            J U D G M E N T

The 1st petitioner is a Peon in the Government High School,

Azhchavattom and the 2nd petitioner is an LDC in the AEO office,

Faroke. Both of them claim to be eligible for the post of HSA

(Physical Science) and to be considered in the 10% quota earmarked

in Ext.P1 Special Rules for ministerial staff.

2. They filed this writ petition at a time when Exts.P12 and

P13 were issued by the PSC proposing to fill up the vacancy

earmarked for the 10% quota by direct recruitment on the ground

that none were available from among the ministerial staff. The

petitioners also sought a direction to the PSC to initiate recruitment

process to fill up the vacancy earmarked for their category.

3. Subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, by Ext.P17,

the PSC has already issued notification inviting applications from

among the ministerial employees for filling up the posts earmarked

for that category. Therefore, once that notification was issued,

W.P.(C) No.1077/2008
-2-

substantial portion of the grievances in the writ petition stands

redressed.

4. Therefore, at this stage, what the petitioners can

legitimately claim is to direct the PSC to expedite the selection

process, that they have already initiated by Ext.P17 notification.

According to the petitioners they have also submitted their

applications.

5. Now that the PSC has initiated recruitment process by

Ext.P17, it is only proper that the PSC expedites the same, and

complete the process as expeditiously as possible. There will be a

direction to that effect. In the meantime, the interim order passed

by this Court restraining filling up of the three vacancies will

continue.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg