IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 18722 of 2010(M)
1. D.BEEBA, PART TIME URUDU TEACHER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE MANAGER,
... Respondent
2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
4. STATE OF KERALA,
For Petitioner :SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :13/09/2010
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). NO. 18722 OF 2010 M
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of September, 2010
JUDGMENT
The case of the petitioner is the following: The petitioner was
appointed as Part Time Urdu Teacher with effect from 1.6.2009 in
Sabari VLNM U.P.School, Vilayanchathanoor, Palakkad District
against the retirement vacancy of one A.Sudevan who was holding
the post of Part Time Urdu Teacher with full time benefits, on being
granted the benefit by Group ‘C’ diversion. The appointment was
approved by the Assistant Educational Officer. There are twelve
periods for Urdu in a week. The School has one Craft Teacher in
Group ‘C’ post with full time status. However, the other Group ‘C’
posts, namely, PET, Music and Drawing are lying vacant. Ext.P2 is
the staff fixation order for the year 2008-09. The petitioner relies on
G.O.(Rt)5014/68/Edn. dated 8.11.1968 (Ext.P3) and G.O.(MS).
129/78/G.Edn. dated 19.9.1978 (Ext.P4). As per Ext.P4, the benefit
granted to Part Time Arabic Teachers has been extended to Urdu
Teachers also. The Government thereafter issued G.O.(Rt)
3460/85/G.Edn. dated 17.9.1985 (Ext.P5) clarifying the matter,
W.P.(C) NO.18722 OF 2010
:: 2 ::
submits the petitioner. The matter was further clarified as per
Exts.P6 and P7 letters. As per G.O.(MS) No.371/2000/G.Edn.
dated 13.11.2000 (Ext.P7(a)), it was further clarified that the posts
created by virtue of Group ‘C’ diversion cannot be treated as
protected and such full time posts cannot be converted into part time
posts. It is also stated in Ext.P7(a) that if any educational officer has
already proceeded with staff fixation and issued irregular orders, he
shall review such orders in accordance with the Government Order.
The petitioner states that there is no teacher in the School who is
availing the benefit of Group ‘C’ diversion and that the petitioner is
entitled to get the periods attached to Drawing, Music and PET so as
to make the part time post as full time post. The petitioner also relies
on Ext.P8 judgment in W.P.(C) No.18975 of 2007, wherein a
direction was issued to the Manager to make the proposal to grant
full time status to a Part Time Sanskrit Teacher and directed the
Assistant Educational Officer to consider and pass orders. Detailing
the above facts, the petitioner submitted Ext.P9 representation dated
9.3.2010 to the Manager of the School.
2. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:
W.P.(C) NO.18722 OF 2010
:: 3 ::
“(i) Writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the
first respondent to forward the Ext.P9
representation to the second respondent with due
recommendations and authentication of the facts
enumerated therein.
(ii) Writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the
second respondent to consider and pass orders
on Ext.P9 representation seeking full time status
by Group C diversion taking into account the
Government orders at Ext.P3 to P7(a) and P8
judgment.
(iii) Writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the
second respondent to grant the benefit of full time
status to the petitioner in the post of L.G.Urdu with
effect from Ext.P1 and grant such other
consequential benefits.
(iv) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to be
conferred with the full time status in the post of
L.G.Urdu with effect from the date of Ext.P1 in the
light of Ext.P3 to P7(a) orders and judgment at
Ext.P8.
and
W.P.(C) NO.18722 OF 2010
:: 4 ::
(v) Issue such other appropriate writ or order or
direction as deemed fit and proper by this
Honourable Court on the facts and circumstances
of the case.”
3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that Ext.P9
representation was forwarded by the Manager to the Assistant
Educational Officer. The Assistant Educational Officer returned
Ext.P9 to the Manager stating that staff fixation was already made
and therefore, the higher authority is to be approached.
4. In the light of the submissions made by the learned
Government Pleader, the learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to file a revision to the
Director of Public Instructions under Rule 12E(3) of Chapter XXIII of
the Kerala Education Rules pointing out all the relevant facts and
there may be a direction to the Director of Public Instructions to
dispose of the revision. The counsel also relies on the decisions in
B.V.R.Kutty Menon v. State of Kerala (2002(2) KLT 73).
In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of
W.P.(C) NO.18722 OF 2010
:: 5 ::
the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, the Writ
Petition is disposed of as follows:
(1) The petitioner is permitted to file a revision under Rule 12E(3)
of Chapter XXIII of the Kerala Education Rules to the Director
of Public Instructions within a period of three weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
(2) On such revision being filed, the Director of Public Instructions
shall dispose of the revision, after affording an opportunity of
being heard to the petitioner and the Manager, as
expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of
two months thereafter.
(3) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and
certified copy of the judgment before the Director of Public
Instructions.
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/