IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 11091 of 2009(F)
1. SMT.SHARI FRANCIS, D/O.FRANCIS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
4. THE ASST. EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
5. THE MANAGER,
6. MERCY VARGHE P.,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SREEKUMAR
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :22/07/2009
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No. 11091 of 2009-F
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2009.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is working as a Lower Primary School Assistant in the
school of the 5th respondent. The petitioner faced retrenchment in the year
2008-2009. According to the petitioner, the Headmistress deliberately
refused to enter the names of 13 students in the admission register which
resulted in the fall of one division in Standard I. Subsequently, an
inspection was conducted in the school by the third respondent wherein
Ext.P1 order was passed stating that the strength of the students is only 36
and the petitioner and another teacher were retrenched. The petitioner filed
a revision petition against Ext.P1, before the second respondent which was
allowed as per Ext.P3. Accordingly, by Ext.P4, the staff fixation order for
the year 2008-2009 was revised and as per Ext.P5, the Manager directed the
Headmistress to disburse the salary and allowances of the petitioner and
another teacher. The petitioner submits that the Headmistress at that time
have not complied with the orders Exts.P4 and P5 and ultimately
explanation was sought for from the Headmistress and by Exts.P7 and P8
the Headmistress was suspended by the 5th respondent and disciplinary
wpc 11091/2009 2
action is also pending. Aggrieved by the delay in disbursement of salary to
the petitioner, this writ petition is filed.
2. On behalf of the 4th respondent, a statement has been filed. It is
submitted in para 15 of the statement that the salary of the petitioner for the
period from 15.7.2008 to 31.3.2009 has already been drawn and disbursed
to her on 6.4.2009. It is further pointed out that the salary of the petitioner
for the fifteen days from 1.7.2008 to 14.7.2008 and festival allowance 2008
had already been drawn by the Headmaster of the school and refunded the
amount to the Sub Treasury, Thrissur as per challan No.359 dated
15.11.2008. It is reported by the Headmaster that the petitioner did not
receive the amount from the Headmaster.
3. In the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner, the petitioner has
pointed out that the action of the Headmaster was not justified.
4. In any view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to be paid the
salary from 1.7.2008 to 14.7.2008 apart from the festival allowance for the
year 2008. Now that the amount has been refunded , steps will be taken by
the present teacher-in-charge, viz. the 6th respondent to get necessary orders
for payment of the amount. Appropriate action will be taken by the 6th
respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of this judgment. Respondents 1 to 4 will grant appropriate sanction
wpc 11091/2009 3
within a further period of three months thereafter.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/