IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 15411 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
NISHA N.K.
AGED 31 YEARS
W/O. RAJIV,
UPSA, EKEM UP SCHOOL, THALUR,
KUDALLUR P.O. PALLAVUR (VIA),
PALAKKAD DISTRICT 678 688.
BY ADVS.
GEORGE ABRAHAM
JOBY D JOSEPH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014.
3 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
PALAKKAD 678 001.
4 ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
KOLLANGODE, PALAKKAD 678 506.
5 MANAGER,
EKEM UP SCHOOL, THALUR, KUDALLUR P.O.
PALLAVUR (VIA), PALAKKAD DISTRICT 678 688.
6 R. RESHMA,
UPSA, EKEM UP SCHOOL,
THALUR, KUDALLUR P.O. PALLAVUR (VIA),
PALAKKAD DISTRICT 678 688.
WP(C) NO. 15411 OF 2021
2
BY ADVS.
ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI(K/160/1985)
M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI
BRIJESH MOHAN
SMT ANIMA M GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 28.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 15411 OF 2021
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner states that she was appointed as an Upper Primary School Assistant ("UPSA") in an additional division vacancy in EKEM UP School, Thalur, Palakkad, an aided school managed by the 5th respondent. Being aggrieved by the rejection of the proposal for approval, the petitioner preferred Ext.P6 revision petition and this Court by Ext.P7 judgment directed the 2nd respondent to consider the revision petitions filed by the petitioner as well as the Manager and take a decision. In terms of the directions, Exhibit P9 order has been passed by the 2nd respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Manager is refusing to implement Ext.P9 order. It is in the aforesaid circumstances, that the petitioner is before this Court seeking directions to the respondents to implement Exhibit P9 order issued by the 2nd respondent and for a further direction to respondents 1 to 3 for approving the appointment of the petitioner as UPSA with effect from 06.06.2019 onwards.
2. In the counter affidavit filed by respondents 5 and 6, they assert that Exhibit P9 order passed by the 2nd respondent cannot be sustained as it was passed without considering all relevant aspects. It is further stated that being aggrieved by Ext.P9 order, the Manager has preferred Ext.R5(a) revision petition before the 1st respondent which is pending consideration.
WP(C) NO. 15411 OF 2021 4
3. I have heard Sri. George Abraham, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. M.U. Vijayalakshmi, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 5 and 6, and the learned Government Pleader.
4. I have considered the submission advanced.
5. The prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the respondents to implement Exhibit P9 order passed by the DGE. However, it appears that being aggrieved by the said order, the 5th respondent has approached the 1st respondent and the matter is pending. I am of the view that it is only appropriate that the 1st respondent consider Exhibit R5(a) revision petition in an expeditious manner so that the entire issue can be resolved.
6. After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by issuing the following directions:
a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.R5(a), after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the party respondents and the petitioner.
WP(C) NO. 15411 OF 2021 5
b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent for further action.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE avs WP(C) NO. 15411 OF 2021 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15411/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 6/6/2019.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE MANAGER BEFORE THE D.E.O. DATED 6/1/2020.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD, REJECTING THE APPROVAL OF APPOINTMENT OF THE PETITIONER, DATED 18/5/2020. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF REVISION FIELD BY THE MANGER AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, DATED 10/7/2020.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT CIRCULAR NO.
J2/21/2020/GE.DN. DATED 9/10/2020.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STATUTORY REVISION FIELD BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 4/11/2020.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 24727/2020 DATED 12TH NOVEMBER 2020.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE HEARING NOTE FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 1/2/2021.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISEUD BY THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, DATED 16/4/2021.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 1.7.2021.
WP(C) NO. 15411 OF 2021 7 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R4(a) TRUE COPY OF G.O(P) No.4/2021 DATED 06.02.2021 Exhibit R5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 27.05.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT (WITHOUT ANNEXURES)