IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 10913 of 2006(Y)
1. SMITHA V.R., H.S.A., ENGLISH,
... Petitioner
2. MINI K.B., H.S.A., ENGLISH,
Vs
1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
For Petitioner :SRI.J.OM PRAKASH
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :18/12/2007
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
=======================
W.P.(C) No.10913 of 2006(Y)
=======================
Dated this the 18th day of December, 2007
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are HSAs in Government Schools. Their
grievance in this writ petition is that although they are eligible for
appointment by transfer as Higher Secondary School Teacher in
the 25% vacancies earmarked for High School Assistants and
U.P. School Assistants and L.P. School Assistants they are not
being considered for such appointment. The contention is that
going by Ext.P7 statement filed by the 1st respondent before this
Court in OP No.31314/02 the total number of posts for Higher
Secondary School Teachers is both HSST and HSST (Junior) is
710 and 25% of that would be 178. Only 176 persons have
been appointed by transfer. Therefore, two more vacancies are
available for being filled up by appointment by transfer is the
contention raised. According to the petitioners, going by Ext.P1
list, petitioners are sl. nos. 59 and 60 and persons up to serial
number 58 have been appointed as Higher Secondary School
W.P.(C) No.10913/2007(Y) -2-
Teacher in the 25% quota. The petitioners therefore, seek
following reliefs:
“i) issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to
Ext. P5 and P6 and quash the same.
ii) issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to
appoint the petitioners from the Ext.P1 List within a time
schedule to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court.”
2. The second respondent have filed a counter affidavit
stating that the total number of posts of Higher Secondary School
Teachers available as on 20.9.07 were 706 and 25% quota out of
that the same would be 176. In respect of Ext.P7, the 2nd
respondent have filed an additional counter affidavit in which it is
stated that what is stated in Ext.P7 is incorrect and the actual
vacancies available in the 25% are only 176. The counsel for the
petitioner would want to discredit the statement by pointing out
that in the first counter affidavit in paragraph 5, they have stated
that 2 lists were prepared on the same date i.e. in respect of
vacancies which occurred till 31.7.02 and for vacancies which
occurred between 1.8.02 to 14.10.03 and nobody was given
appointment as HSST/HSST (Junior) in English from these
Schools as there were no vacancies in English that arose during
this period, in R2(A) produced along with additional counter
W.P.(C) No.10913/2007(Y) -3-
affidavit in W.P.(C) No.24799/04 the statement is that during
the same period four retirement vacancies occurred of which
three vacancies were reported to the Public Service Commission.
3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. The
petitioner’s have no contention that the respondents have any
particular motive in reducing the number of posts to 706 from
710. The 2nd respondent who is a the responsible officer has
filed a counter affidavit to the effect that actual number of posts
is only 706. He has also explained the discrepancy in Ext.P7.
Further, the petitioner himself has along with this reply affidavit
produced Ext.P8 statement filed by the 2nd respondent in W.P.
(C) No.10899/04 in which also the number of posts under 25%
category is given as 176. As such I have no reason to now
disbelieve the statements in the counter affidavit that the number
of vacancies in the 25% category come only to 176. That being
so, I do not find any merit in the contentions in the writ petition
and accordingly, the same is dismissed.
S.SIRI JAGAN,
JUDGE
jp