Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 17036
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J
SAJEENA. J – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA, – Respondent
WP(C)/42392/2022
V.A.MUHAMMED, M.SAJJAD
Administrative authorities must consider and resolve staff fixation requests promptly according to established procedures and within a specific time frame.
Headnote:
Writ - Staff Fixation - Act Section List - The court directed the education department to review staff fixation requests based on established ratios, mandating an expeditious order issuance within three months and ensuring the opportunity for hearings.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought directions for revising the staff fixation for the academic year 2014-15 and to declare her entitlement for a specific post within the academic institution.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to have her staff fixation request considered and orders issued in a timely manner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed the necessity for administrative bodies to respond to fixation and appointment requests in accordance with established guidelines and within a stipulated time frame.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with directions to the authorities.
This writ petition is filed seeking issuance of directions to the respondents to revise the staff fixation order for the year 2014-15 by applying 1:35 ratio in UP Section and to sanction 16th post of UPSA in the Janatha HSS, Thampanoor. The petitioner has also sought for a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to continue as 16th UPSA in the academic year
2014-15 and for ancillary reliefs.
2. Sri.M.Sajjad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P7 before the 2nd respondent and requests that necessary directions be issued to the 2nd respondent to consider the same in an expeditious manner.
3. Heard Smt. Nisha Bose, the learned senior Government Pleader.
4. In view of the limited nature of the relief sought, no prejudice would be caused to respondents 4 and 5 if notice is dispensed with.
5. 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 at the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:
a) There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P7, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorized representative and respondents 4 and 5.
b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within 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
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42392/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 4.6.2012 ALONG WITH APPROVAL THEREIN.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE MANAGER VIDE ORDER NO 03/2012-13 DATED 1.3.2013.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ATTINGAL VIDE ORDER NO B2/1775/2013 DATED 7.6.2013.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO
24265/2017 DATED 21.07.2017.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ATTINGAL VIDE ORDER NO B2/1028/2016 DATED 25.11.2017.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 14.08.2014.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY REVISION PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DIRECTOR DATED
12.07.2022.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO 37644/17 DATED 24.03.2019.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL
