High Court Kerala High Court

P.R.John Ditto vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
P.R.John Ditto vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19456 of 2008(N)


1. P.R.JOHN DITTO, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,

3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION),

4. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

5. MANAGER, ST.RAPHAEL'S HIGH SCHOOL,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :11/07/2008

 O R D E R
                                       K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                  ............................................................................
                              W.P.(C) No. 19456 OF 2008
                  ............................................................................
                                 Dated this the 11th July, 2008



                                         J U D G M E N T

The petitioner was appointed as U.P.S.A. at St.Raphel’s High School,

Ezhupunna, an aided school managed by the fifth respondent, with effect from 1.6.2005.

It is stated that she was appointed in the vacancy consequent on the posting of P.P.

Thankamma as L.P.S.A. in the vacancy consequent on the transfer of Smt.

Philomina P.R. to St. Martin’s U.P.School, Neendakara, under the same management

in the vacancy of M.P. Augustine who retired on 31.03.2005. Originally the District

Educational Officer, Cherthala declined approval of appointment of the petitioner on the

ground that there was no sanctioned post. The Manager filed an appeal before the

Deputy Director of Education, Alappuzha. The Deputy Director of Education called for a

report from the District District Educational Officer, Cherthala. It is stated that the

District Educational Officer submitted Ext.P2 reported dated 26.6.2006 stating that there

was a vacancy to accommodate the petitioner. Thereafter, the Deputy Director of

Education allowed the appeal as per Ext.P3 order dated 29.6.2006 and approved the

appointment of the petitioner with effect from 1.6.2005. It was found that there was a

vacancy for accommodating the petitioner with effect from 1.6.2005. On the basis of

Ext.P3 order dated 29.6.2006, the District Educational Officer approved the

appointment of the petitioner with effect from 1.6.2005.

W.P.(C) No. 19456 OF 2008

2

2. The Director of Public Instruction conducted an audit in the Office of the

Deputy Director of Education, Alappuzha. An objection was raised that the Manager

unauthorisedly shifted approved UPSAs as LPSAs for making fresh appointments

without obtaining departmental sanction. The Deputy Director of Education, on the

basis of the audit objection, issued Ext.P8 letter dated 15.5.2008 to the District

Educational Officer stating that the Director of Public Instruction has directed the Deputy

Director of Education to cancel the approval of appointment of the petitioner and till a

final decision is taken by the Director of Public Instruction, not to disburse the salary to

the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged Ext.P8 letter dated 15.5.2008 in this Writ

Petition. As per Ext. P8 order similar direction was issued in respect of another teacher

, namely, Maijo Kuruvilla. Maijo Kuruvilla challenged the order dated 15.05.2008 in

W.P.(C) No. 16126 of 2008.

3. In the counter affidavit filed by the Deputy Director of Education, in W.P.

(C) No. 16126 of 2008 (Exhibit P9), it was stated as follows:-

“2. It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner Smt.Maijo

Kuruvila and Sri.John Ditto were appointed as Upper Primary

School Assistants with effect from 1.6.2005 onwards against the

promotion vacancy of Smt.Sheeba Varghese and in the transfer

vacancy of Smt. Thankamma respectively. At the time of these

appointments there were only 16 UPSA’s on the roll, including

Smt.Maijo Kuruvila and Sri. John Ditto, against the sanctioned

post of 16 UPSA’s. However later Government by G.O.(Rt)

No.4260/05/Gl.Edn. Dated 1.10.05 have ordered to approve the

appointments of Sri.Dennis George and Smt.Annie. M.J. (Whose

W.P.(C) No. 19456 OF 2008

3

appointments were approved as LPSA with effect from 29.11.04

and continuing as LPSA in the school) as UPSA with effect from

5.6.02. Hence, the District Educational Officer, Cherthala has

rejected the appointment of Smt.Maijo Kuruvila and Sri. John

Ditto stating that there were no sanctioned post of UPSA to

provide the appointees. However appeal filed by the Manager

was allowed by this Office as the objection raised by the District

Educational Officer, Cherthala was occured due to the issuance

of G.O.(Rt) No.4260/05/Gl.Edn. dated 1.10.05 and the Manager

has made necessary arrangements in this regard whcih is

detailed as follows:-

3. Smt. Annie. M.J. and Sri.Dennis George were appointed

as UPSA in St.Raphel’s H.S.Ezhupunna with effect from 5.6.02

and these appointments were rejected at first by the department

on the reason that protected HSA’s of the school who were

deployed in the Government schools should have been absorbed

against these vacancies, in terms of para (3) of G.O(P)

No.178/02/Gl.Edn. dated 28.6.2002. Hence after recalling these

protected High School Assistants to the parent school, the

Manager re-appointed the above two teachers against the

available vacancies of Lower Primary School Assistants

w.e.f.29.11.2004 and the District Educational Officer, Cherthala

has approved their appointments as LPSA from 29.11.04 and

they were continued in the school as such. However, they filed

W.P.(c) No.16092/05 before the Hon’ble High Court for their

approval of appointment as UPSA from 5.6.02 onwards.

Meanwhile Smt.Maijo Kuruvila and Sri.John Ditto were appointed

as UPSA w.e.f. 1.6.05 in the vacancies of UPSA during 2005.

However, on the basis of the Hon’ble High Court direction in

judgment dated 30.5.05 in W.P.(c) 16092/05 the Government

W.P.(C) No. 19456 OF 2008

4

vide G.O.(Rt) No.4620/05/Gl.Edn. dated 1.10.05 directed the

District Educational Officer, Cherthala to approve the

appointment of Smt. Annie M.J. and Sri.Dennis George as UPSA

w.e.f. 5.6.02 itself. Hence by the issuance of the Government

Order dated 1.10.05 the total number of UPSA’s become 18

against the sanctioned post 16, even though Smt.Annie M.J. and

Sri.Dennis George worked as LPSA from 29.11.04 with the

earlier approval from the District Educational Officer, Cherthala.

Hence on immediate receipt of the G.O(Rt) dated 1/10/05 in order

to arrange the excess two UPSA’s the Manager has issued

proceedings Dated 4.10.05 by adjusting 2 T.T.C. holder UPSA’s

namely Smt. P.V.Thresia and Sri. N.T.Ralpy to the available

vacancies in the L.P.Section. Hence it was clear that there were

vacancies for the appointments of Smt.Majo Kuruvila and

Sri.John Ditto with effect from 1.6.05 (there were only 16 UPSA’s

in the roll as on 1.6.05 against the sanctioned post of 16,

including the appointee), the shifting of UPSA’s made by the

Manager on 4.10.05 was for the compliance of the Government

Order Dated 1.10.05. However the Manager had not obtained

prior sanction from the District Educational Officer, Cherthala for

the shifting of UPSA. Hence this Office has ratified the action of

the Manager for the shifting of UPSA’s exercising the power of

the appellate authority and directed the District Educational

Officer, Cherthala to approve the appointment of Smt.Maijo

Kuruvila and Sri. John Ditto as UPSA with effect from 1.6.05.

            4.      However the audit cell        of the Director of Public

            Instruction,    Thiruvananthapuram       has      objected   these

            appointments.     Reply furnished by this office was also not

accepted by the audit cell pointing that at the time of issuance of

the G.O.(Rt) No.4260/05 dated 1.10.05 there were 18 UPSA’s in

W.P.(C) No. 19456 OF 2008

5

the roll (including the two unapproved UPSA’s (Smt.Maijo

Kuruvila and Sri.John Ditto) against the sanctioned post of 16

UPSA’s.

5. In the above circumstances the Deputy Director of

Education as per letter No.B1.3361/08 dt.15.5.08 had requested

Director of Public Instruction, Thiruvananthapuram to cancel the

appointments of Smt.Maijo Kuruvila and Sri.John Ditto as UPSA’s

from 1.6.05 and directed District Educational Officer, Cherthala to

stop payments of salary to these teachers, now the matter is

pending with the Director of Public Instruction,

Thiruvananthapuram. Therefore Writ Petition is devoid of merit.”.

4. W.P.(C) No. 16126 of 2008 was disposed of by me as per Ext. P10

judgment dated 12.06.2008. This Writ Petition is also to be disposed of in the same

manner.

5. A perusal of Exhibit P9 counter affidavit shows that the matter is not

finally decided by the Director of Public Instruction. Ext.P8 letter was issued without

hearing the petitioner. The Director of Public Instruction has also not heard the

petitioner as well as the Manager. At the same time, till a final decision is taken in the

matter, the Director of Public Instruction has directed the Deputy Director of Education,

Alappuzha to withhold the salary of the petitioner. The Deputy Director has in turn

issued Exhibit P8 letter to the District Educational Officer with copy to the Manager, the

Headmaster and the petitioner. To my mind, the direction to withhold the salary is

illegal. The appointment of the petitioner from 1.6.2005 was approved by the

W.P.(C) No. 19456 OF 2008

6

competent authority. Unless and until it is found after hearing the petitioner as well as

the Manager that the approval of appointment of the petitioner was illegal, it is not

proper to withhold the salary of the petitioner. At the same time, the matter has to be

finalised by the Director of Public Instruction.

In these circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:-

(1) The Director of Public Instruction shall issue notice to the petitioner as well

as the Manager, hear them and finally decide the matter after considering all the

contentions put forward by the petitioner as well as the Manager.

(2) Till a final decision is taken by the Director of Public Instruction, Ext.P8

shall be kept in abeyance and the direction to withhold the salary of the petitioner shall

not be implemented. Needless to say that this direction will have the effect of taking

necessary steps by the respondents to continue to pay the salary of the petitioner.

K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.

lk