IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19220 of 2010(B)
1. KUMARI MAYA.S.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
5. THE HEADMASTER,
6. THE MANAGER,
7. SMT.INDIRA DEVI,
8. SRI.MOHAN KUMAR,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Dated :21/06/2010
O R D E R
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P. (C) No. 19220 OF 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 21st day of June, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner was appointed in John F. Kennady
Memorial V.H.S School, Ayanivelikulangara as High School
Assistant(Physical Science). She was also qualified to be
appointed as High School Assistant(English). The said
appointment of the petitioner was approved. Subsequently,
pursuant to the staff fixation for the year 2006-07, the
petitioner had faced with threat of retrenchment. In the
revision petition preferred by the petitioner in the said matter
Government have issued Ext.P1. Ext.P1 would reveal that
Government have considered the case of the petitioner as a
special case and ordered to accommodate the petitioner
against the second vacancy of High School Assistant(English)
with effect from 2009-2010. Ext.P2 is the staff fixation order
for the year 2009-10. In Ext.P2 the 8th respondent who was
originally appointed as HSA (Maths) was ordered to be treated
as HSA (English) in preference to the petitioner and the
petitioner who was ordered as per Ext.P1 to be accommodated
WPC.19220/2010
: 2 :
against the second vacancy of HSA(English) was ordered to be
deployed after treating her as HSA(Physical Science). In
short. the grievance of the petitioner is that while issuing the
said order, Ext.P1 order was not taken into consideration.
Raising the aforesaid grievances against Ext.P2 the petitioner
has filed Ext.P3 before the second respondent and the
Manager of the school has preferred Ext.P4 before the second
respondent. Exts. P3 and P4 are pending before the second
respondent. The short prayer of the petitioner is only for a
direction to the second respondent to consider and pass
orders on Exts P3 and P4 in the light of Ext.P1.
2. Ext.P1 would reveal that the case of the petitioner
was treated as a special one and Government have ordered to
accommodate the petitioner as HSA(English) as against the
second vacancy with effect from 2009-2010. The grievance of
the petitioner against Ext.P2 is that the said order in Ext.P1
was not taken into consideration while ordering deployment of
the petitioner. Since the grievance was already taken before
the second respondent by the petitioner as also by the
Manager through Exts.P3 and P4 and they are now pending
WPC.19220/2010
: 3 :
before the second respondent, I am disposing of this writ
petition with a direction to the second respondent to consider
and pass order on Exts.P3 and P4, in the light of Ext.P1,
expeditiously, at any rate within a period of two months from
the date of receipt of copy of this judgment with notice to the
petitioner and respondents 6 to 8.
Sd/-
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)
jma
//true copy//
P.A to Judge