IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 28338 of 2010(N)
1. BINDU K, W/O.PRAKASH, AGED 36 YEARS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
5. THE MANAGER
For Petitioner :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :29/09/2010
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). NO. 28338 OF 2010 N
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of September, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was appointed as full time Sanskrit Teacher on
1.6.2007 in Edacherry North U.P.School, Post Edacherry North,
Kozhikode District, in the retirement vacancy of one K.Kumaran who
retired on 31.3.2007. The appointment of the petitioner was
approved only as part time Sanskrit Teacher as per Ext.P1 order
passed by the Assistant Educational Officer. Aggrieved by that
order, the Manager filed appeal to the Deputy Director of Education,
who confirmed the order passed by the Assistant Educational
Officer, as per the order dated 21.12.2007. The Manager filed
Ext.P2 revision before the Director of Public Instruction. But, the
revision was dismissed by the Director of Public Instruction. The
Manager filed Ext.P3 revision dated 27.12.2007 before the
Government. According to the petitioner, Ext.P3 revision is pending
disposal. The contention of the Manager as well as the petitioner is
that once a post is created by way of group ‘C’ diversion, such a post
cannot be converted as part time. The petitioner relies on Ext.P6
W.P.(C) NO.28338 OF 2010
:: 2 ::
Government Order, G.O.(MS) No.371/2000/G.Edn. dated
13.11.2000, in support of that contention. Ext.P5 staff fixation order
is also produced to support the contention that the post was created
by group ‘C’ diversion.
2. The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner are the following:
“(i) declare that the Petitioner is entitled to get her
appointment vide Exhibit P-1 approved as full-
time;
(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ
order or direction commanding the Respondents
to grant full-time service benefits to the Petitioner
since Exhibit P-1;
(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ
order or direction commanding the 1st Respondent
to effectively consider and pass appropriate
orders upon Exhibit P-3 after affording an
opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner within
a time limit;
(iv) pass such other order or direction which this
Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper o grant in
the circumstances of the case.”
W.P.(C) NO.28338 OF 2010
:: 3 ::
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it
would be sufficient, for the time being, if relief (iii) is granted.
4. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions,
submitted that Ext.P3 was not traced out in the Department
concerned. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, if so,
the petitioner may be permitted to file a revision before the first
respondent challenging Exts.P1 and the order passed by the Director
of Public Instruction. The counsel submits that the petitioner will file
the Revision within one month from today. The counsel also
submitted that the second page of Ext.P3 would disclose that the
revision was sent by post on 27.12.2007.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is
disposed of as follows:
(a) The first respondent shall consider and dispose of Ext.P3
revision dated 27.12.2007 filed by the Manager challenging
the order passed by the Director of Public Instruction. If by
some chance, Ext.P3 is not traced out, the first respondent
W.P.(C) NO.28338 OF 2010
:: 4 ::
shall dispose of the revision that may be filed within a period of
one month from today by the petitioner.
(b) The first respondent shall dispose of Ext.P3 revision and/or
the Revision that may be filed by the petitioner as
expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of
three months from the date of receipt of the revision petition
that may be filed by the petitioner, after affording an
opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the Manager.
(c) The petitioner shall send a copy of this judgment and a copy of
the Writ Petition to the Manager by registered post and shall
produce proof of the same before the first respondent.
Petitioner shall also produce a copy of the Writ Petition and
certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent.
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/