LAKSHMI.V.S Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise from a common judgment dated 06.03.2015 in W.P.(C)Nos.1294 and 1491 of 2009. Ext.P11 Government order was under challenge in W.P.(C)No.1294/2009 and W.P.(C) No.1491/2009 was filed to implement the said order. The learned Single Judge after considering the issues upheld Ext.P11 and directed that the said order has to be implemented approving the appointment of Sri. T.S.Babu, H.S.A. (Mathematics) for the period from 02.06.2004 to 14.09.2006 in DBHS, Vamanapuram and to pay the consequential benefits. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for Sri. T.S.Babbu that he had already received all the benefits.

(2.) The appellants herein, while filing separate appeals against the impugned judgment, inter alia contended that the Government while issuing Ext.P11 order did not consider the respective staff fixation orders. Even if Sri. T.S. Babu is accommodated as directed in Ext.P11, there was no necessity to retrench any of the teachers as there were sufficient vacancies to accommodate them in the schools managed by the Corporate Management. There were two vacancies in the D.B.H.S., Cheriyanad during 2004 - 05 and Smt. Jayasudha R. alone was appointed as HSA (English) as per Ext.P5 order dated 01.07.2004. One vacancy was still available.

(3.) The counsel for Smt. Jayasudha R. contended that, if for any reason, Smt. Lakshmi V.S., who had to be displaced from her position as H.S.A. (English) from the D.B.H.S., Vamanapuam, she could be accommodated in the vacant post available at Cheriyanad school, in which event, there is no necessity to retrench any person as directed by the Government in Ext.P11. It has been specifically contended that the Smt. Jayasudha R. alone was appointed in the Cheriyanad School and the other post was clearly vacant. If that be the situation, we are of the view that there was no necessity to retrench any other teacher.