IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 11665 of 2009(C)
1. CORPORATE MANAGER OF C.M.S SCHOOLS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
4. STATE OF KERALA
5. LEENA K.OOMMEN
For Petitioner :SRI.BABU VARGHESE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :07/04/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.11665 of 2009
--------------------------------------
Dated 7th April, 2009
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.Babu Varghese, the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and Sri.A.J.Varghese, the learned Government Pleader
appearing for respondents 1 to 4. In the nature of the order that I
propose to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to or hear the fifth
respondent.
2. The fifth respondent is a teacher working in
C.M.S.L.P.School, Kappil managed by the petitioner. She was formerly
working in C.M.S. L.P. School, Kayippuram. With effect from 4.6.2007
she was transferred to C.M.S.L.P. School, Kappil. That appointment was
not approved by the District Educational Officer. Aggrieved thereby the
petitioner filed a revision petition before the Director of Public
Instruction. By Ext.P6 order passed on 18.12.2008, the Additional
Director of Public Instruction directed the Assistant Educational Officer,
Kayamkulam to approve the transfer appointment of the fifth respondent
as LPSA in C.M.S. L.P.School, Kappil subject to the condition that the
resultant vacancy should be filled up by a protected hand. The Director
of Public Instruction thereupon sent Ext.P7 letter dated 28.2.2009 to the
Assistant Educational Officer, Kayamkulam directing him to approve the
WP(C).No.11665/2009 2
fifth respondent’s transfer appointment and also to take steps to fill up
the resultant vacancy that had arisen in C.M.S. L.P.School, Kayippuram
by appointing a protected hand. The Manager was also directed to
appoint a protected teacher in the resultant vacancy wherever the
vacancy arises under this management due to re-arrangement of
transfer vacancies. The petitioner has aggrieved by the stipulations in
Ext.P7 filed Ext.P10 revision petition before the Government. In this
writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P7 and in the alternative
prays for a direction to the Government to consider Ext.P10 revision
petition and pass orders thereon after affording the petitioner a
reasonable opportunity of being heard.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits
that the Director of Public Instruction could not have directed the
management to fill up transfer vacancies by accommodating protected
hands. In my opinion, the question whether the direction issued by
Director of Public Instruction in Ext.P7 is sustainable or not is primarily
a matter to be decided by the Government in the first instance. The
petitioner has filed Ext.P10 revision petition before the Government
canvassing the correctness of the directions issued by the Director of
Public Instruction in Ext.P7. I am therefore of the opinion that the
petitioner should pursue the said remedy before seeking the
intervention of this Court.
WP(C).No.11665/2009 3
I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to
the Secretary to Government, General Education Department to
consider Ext.P10 and pass orders thereon after affording the petitioner
and the fifth respondent a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Final orders in the matter shall be passed within a period of three
months from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy
of this judgment. Till final orders are passed as directed above, status
quo as on today shall be maintained.
P.N.RAVINDRAN
Judge
TKS