ANAND A. Vs. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P(c) No.10503/2011 is filed by the Manager of Arianchira A.U.P School, which is an aided school (hereinafter referred to as 'the School'), challenging Exts.P17 and P18 orders issued by the Director of Public Instructions ('DPI' for short), who directed that Smt. P.P.Chandrika the 5th respondent in this Writ Petition, who was appointed in August 2001, shall be retained in the U.P Section and staff fixation for the year 2010 -11 should be revised accordingly. The very same orders are under challenge in Writ Petition No.11980/2011 filed by one Santhilal.S, who got himself impleaded as additional 6th respondent in the writ petition filed by the Manager, but on different grounds. His grievance is that the DPI did not consider his case before issuing orders, despite his representation for a hearing and retention in UP School, based on his appointment and continuous service in UP Section since the year 1992. According to Sri Santhilal he, being senior in accordance with the date of appointment in the year 1992, is entitled to be included in the U.P Section while revising the Staff Fixation Orders.

(2.) Since the issue arising in these cases is one and the same, i.e in respect of the staff fixation for the year 2010 -11 and the shifting of LPSAs and UPSAs in the very same School, these two Writ Petitions are disposed of by a common judgment. The parties and documents are as referred to in W.P(c) No.10503/2011 unless otherwise specifically mentioned.

(3.) In the staff fixation for the year 2010 -11 -Ext P14, one division each was reduced in the UP Section and LP section of the School by which there was a reduction of one post each of UPSA and LPSA. It was also ordered that the 5th respondent Smt.Chandrika, LPSA was retrenched with effect from The 5th respondent Smt.Chandrika challenged the 15.7.2010. same before the Director of Public Instructions submitting Ext.P15 petition and immediately thereafter she filed W.P(c) No.31424/2010. By Ext.P16 judgment dated 13.10.2010 this court directed the DPI to dispose of her revision petition after affording an opportunity of hearing to her and other affected parties. It was made clear that she would not be entitled to claim salary till the disposal of the Revision Petition, unless it was found that she could be accommodated regularly as UPSA. 5th After notice to the respondent, the Manager, one Smt.P.R.Smitha, a UPSA and the Educational officers, the DPI passed Ext.P17 order after hearing them. The DPI found that the Manager was effecting illegal transfers of UPSAs and LPSAs from either section from time to time. Referring to the contentions raised by the 5th respondent Chandrika, the DPI found several irregularities in accommodating Smt. Mini and Smt. Smitha in the UP Section, even with connivance of the educational officers, which was impermissible. Pointing out the amendment effected in Chapter XXXI of KER insisting the qualification of TTC for appointment as LPSAs, DPI stated that the Degree holders with B.Ed Degree, but without having TTC, could be appointed only in UP section, while TTC holders could be appointed as LPSAs as well as UPSAs. At the same time, it was found that the posts of LPSAs and UPSAs were distinct and different as per Rule 2(a) and (b) of Chapter II and Rules 5(2)(3) of Chapter XXIII of KER. DPI reminded that Government have issued orders directing that no transfer is admissible between LP section and UP section; it is found that in the light of the Government letter No.35528/J(3)/04 dt.11.11.2004, by which the Government had made it clear that transfers from LP section to UP section and from UP section to LP section cannot be permitted, Manager should not have transferred Smt. Chandrika the 5th respondent who was appointed and approved in the post of UPSA, to LP section. DPI further found that Smt A.Mini and P.R.Smitha were shifted to the vacancy caused by shifting Smt.Chandrika, which was illegal. Therefore it was directed that, she should be accommodated in U.P Section and given approval. Accordingly the DPI directed the Assistant Educational Officer (AEO), Shoranur to revise the staff fixation directing that the junior most teacher should be retrenched. Thereafter the AEO issued Ext.P18 order accommodating Smt.Chandrika as UPSA.