P.C. AHAMMEDKUTTY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition has been preferred by the Manager of Neerolpalam A.M.L.P. School as the 1st petitioner and a teacher, who was appointed as Lower Primary School Assistant (LPSA) in the said School on 23.7.2008, as the 2nd petitioner. The grievance of the writ petitioners is essentially against the refusal by the respondents of grant of approval to the appointment of the 2nd petitioner as an LPSA in the said School with effect from 23.7.2008. The averments in the writ petition disclose that against a vacancy arising from the posting of an earlier incumbent Smt.Nasheeda Fathima to a regular post pursuant to the promotion of an another LPSA as Head Master, the 2nd petitioner was appointed as LPSA against the anticipated additional post in the School from 2006 -07 academic year onwards. When the appointment of the 2nd petitioner was sent for approval before the 5th respondent, the same was rejected by Ext.P2 order on the ground that since there was no additional post sanctioned in the School, there was no vacancy in existence to which the 2nd petitioner could be accommodated. In an appeal preferred against Ext.P2 order, the 4th respondent rejected the request for approval vide Ext.P3 order on the ground that there was no provision to sanction an additional post in view of the ban imposed by the Government. On a further appeal preferred by the 1st petitioner against Ext.P3 order, the 2nd respondent remitted the matter to the 5th respondent for a fresh consideration of the matter based on Exts.P10 and P11 Government orders. It is pointed out that no action was taken by the 5th respondent pursuant to the said direction by the 2nd respondent.

(2.) IN the staff fixation orders for the period from 2007 -08 to 2009 -10, it was found that there were sufficient divisions in the School to sanction one additional post of LPSA. This is evident from Exts.P6, P7 and P8 staff fixation orders. In the year 2010 -11 however, there was a division fall and consequently one post of LPSA was reduced from the staff strength in the said School. Ext.P9 staff fixation order for 2010 -11 would reveal this. Ext.P13 order dated 14.10.2010 is relied upon by the petitioners to indicate that an order was passed in the case of Smt.Nasheeda Fathima approving her appointment to the additional post with effect from 28.7.2006.

(3.) ALTHOUGH the writ petition was filed in 2012, no counter affidavit is seen filed on behalf of the respondents. It is seen, however, that when the matter came up before this Court on 25.2.2014, by way of an interim order in I.A.No.965/2014, the 5th respondent was directed to consider the question of approval of appointment of the 2nd petitioner on the basis of the bond which was by then executed by the 1st petitioner Manager. In response to the said interim order, the 5th respondent vide Ext.P19 order dated 24.3.2014 has once again refused approval to the appointment of the 2nd petitioner in the said School. Ext.P19 discloses that the reasons for the refusal are twofold namely, (a) that in the staff fixation for the year 2010 -11, there was fall in division and consequently with effect from 15.7.2010 there was no sanctioned post to which the 2nd petitioner could be accommodated and (b) that as regards the period prior to that, insofar as the Manager had not submitted a bond in terms of GO(P)199/2011 dated 1.10.2011, the appointment of the 2nd petitioner with effect from 23.7.2008 onwards also could not be approved. It is also stated that the 2nd petitioner cannot be included in the teachers package. The request for approval of the 2nd petitioner's appointment was therefore rejected in toto.