High Court Kerala High Court

M.V.Mini vs The State Of Kerala on 24 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
M.V.Mini vs The State Of Kerala on 24 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 10045 of 2010(E)


1. M.V.MINI, AGED 31 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

4. THE HEADMASTER, PATTUVAM U.P.SCHOOL,

5. THE MANAGER, PATTUVAM U.P.SCHOOL,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :24/03/2010

 O R D E R
                       S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                  W.P.(C)No. 10045 of 2010
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010


                         J U D G M E N T

The petitioner was appointed as a U.P.S.A. in the

5th respondent’s school from 01.06.2005 against a

promotion vacancy. The petitioner’s appointment was

approved and her probation was also declared. During the

staff fixation for the year 2008-09, there was reduction of

one post in the U.P.S.A. and increase in one post of L.P.S.A.

Consequently the number of teachers continued to be the

same. According to the petitioner, at the relevant time, the

post of L.P.S.A. and U.P.S.A were interchangeable. The

amendment to the Kerala Education Rules restraining

shifting of UPSA as LPSA and vice versa came into force

only with effect from 16.09.2009. Therefore according to

the petitioner, the petitioner should have been retained in

W.P.(C)No. 10045 of 2010
-2-

the school notwithstanding the reduction of one post of

U.P.S.A., since she could have been accommodated as an

L.P.S.A. at the relevant time. However the educational

authority is of the view that the petitioner is not on the rolls

since 15.07.2008. In the above circumstances, the

petitioner has filed Ext.P4 revision petition before the

1st respondent. Petitioner seeks a direction to the

1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4

expeditiously.

2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader

also. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose

of this writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to

consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 as expeditiously as

possible, at any rate within a period of three months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after

affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as

well as the 5th respondent.

W.P.(C)No. 10045 of 2010
-3-

3. The petitioner shall forward a copy of the writ

petition along with a certified copy of this judgment to the

1st respondent for compliance.

S. SIRI JAGAN
JUDGE

shg/