K.R. LINI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner entered service as High School Assistant (Maths) on 3.6.1992 against a leave vacancy of Smt. Lekha Sahadevan. Thereafter she was again appointed against the extension of her earlier leave vacancy, for a period from 4.8.2000 to 3.8.2003. When the appointment was sent for approval before the departmental authority, the approval was granted only for the period from 4.8.2000 to 14.7.2001. Thereafter, the petitioner continued in the post, without being retrenched, on application of the 1:40 ratio envisaged under the various Government Orders issued to protect teachers, including those appointed against leave vacancies from retrenchment consequent to division fall. The petitioner was again appointed against the extension of leave vacancy for the period from 4.8.2003 to 3.8.2006. Once again, in terms of Ext. P2 Government Order, the second respondent approved the appointment of the petitioner from 15.7.2001 to 31.3.2006.

(2.) IT is relevant to note that the Government had, through various Government orders, directed that the teacher -student ratio should be revised from 1:45 to 1:40 in the schools affected by the specific problem of division fall, for the limited purpose of accommodating the teachers rendered surplus. The benefit has been extended on a yearly basis by specific orders to cover the period up to and inclusive of the year 2006 -07 as well. Ext. P3 is the Government Order, extending the benefit of 1:40 teacher -student ratio for the academic year 2006 -07. It was directed in Ext. P3 Government Order that Educational Officers should revise the staff fixation order wherever it was necessary. It is in this factual background that the issue with regard to approval of the petitioner's appointment for the period from 31.3.2006 to 3.8.2011 came up for consideration before the authorities.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the second respondent wherein, at paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 it is stated as follows: