Kerala High Court
Asha.P. Achankunju vs State Of Kerala on 18 August, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1939
WP(C).No. 8880 of 2018
PETITIONER:
ASHA.P. ACHANKUNJU,
AGED 28 YEARS, D/O.ACHANKUNJU,
LPSA, ST.MARY'S U.P.SCHOOL,
KOZHIMALA, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 541,
MOB: 9946177973, RESIDING AT ST.MARY'S CONVENT,
KOZHIMALA, PATANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 541.
BY ADV.SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN
RESPONDENT(S):
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 101.
4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 101.
5. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 541.
6. THE MANAGER,
ST.MARY'S UP SCHOOL, KOZHIMALA, PULLAD,
PATHANAMTHITTA-689 541.
7. THE HEADMASTER,
ST.MARY'S UP SCHOOL, KOZHIMALA, PULLAD,
PATHANAMTHITTA-689 541.
R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 15-03-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
24/3/2018
WP(C).No. 8880 of 2018 (H)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1- A TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER DATED 18/08/2010
ISSUED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2- A TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER DATED 14/07/2011
ISSUED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 06/06/2011.
EXHIBIT P4- A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 07/02/2012
OF THE FIFTH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5- A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SECOND
RESPONDENT DATED 30/07/2012.
EXHIBIT P6- A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13/09/2013 OF THE
FOURTH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7- A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20/08/2014 OF THE
SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8- A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH
RESPONDENT DATED 11/09/2017.
EXHIBIT P9- A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 08/12/2016
SUBMITTED BY THE SIXTH RESPONDENT TO
THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10- A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 13/12/2017
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P11- A TRUE COPY OF THE SUPPLEMENTARY REVISION
PETITION DATED 30/01/2018 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P12- A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25/10/2011 OF FIRST
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
sts
24/3/2018
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.8880 of 2018
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of March, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who has been appointed as an LPSA in the School managed by the 6th respondent, has approached this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P4 order dated 7.2.2012 of the 5th respondent Assistant Educational Officer, Ext.P5 order dated 30.7.2012 of the 2 nd respondent Director of Public Instructions, Ext.P6 order dated 13.9.2013 of the 4 th respondent District Educational Officer and Ext.P7 order dated 20.8.2014 of the 2nd respondent Director of Public Instructions, and seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 5 th respondent Assistant Educational Officer to approve her appointment as LPSA from 6.6.2011 with all consequential benefits including pay and allowances. The petitioner has also sought for a declaration that her appointment as LPSA from 6.6.2011 is against the substantive posts caused due to the abolition of shift system and it is liable to be approved as no protected teacher from the 6 th W.P.(C)No.8880 of 2018 :-2-:
respondent School was waiting to be accommodated against the said post. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has already filed Ext.P10 revision petition under Rule 92 of Chapter XIVA of KER before the 1st respondent, which was followed by Ext.P11 supplementary revision petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 5.
Considering the nature of relief proposed to be granted, service of notice on respondents 6 and 7 is dispensed with.
4. During the course of arguments, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Exts.P10 and P11 revision petitions filed by the petitioner are now pending consideration before the 1st respondent and therefore, the said respondent may be directed to consider and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.
5. The learned Government Pleader would submit that the 1st respondent shall consider Exts.P10 and P11 revision petitions and take an appropriate decision thereon, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.
W.P.(C)No.8880 of 2018
:-3-:
In such circumstances, without going into the merits of the contentions raised in this writ petition, the same is disposed of by directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P10 and P11 revision petitions filed by the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner and also to the 6 th respondent Manager, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
All legal and factual contentions raised by the petitioner are left open to be raised before the 1 st respondent, at appropriate stage.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE ami/16.3.18 //True copy// P.A.to Judge