Government Orders cannot supersede statutory provisions regarding employment appointments within educational institutions; valid appointments must align with statutory requirements.

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is working as U.P.S.A. in Sacred Heart U.P. School, Kottamala, managed by the third respondent. She was appointed, as per Ext.P1, with effect from 16/06/2008 in a regular vacancy that arose pursuant to the promotion of Smt.Renu Adhikari, U.P.S.A as H.S.A (Natural Science) at M.P.M. High School, Chungathara. The second respondent approved the appointment only on daily wage basis from 16/06/2008 to 31/03/2009, which is evident from Ext.P2. This was done mainly relying upon G.O.(P) No.104/2008/G.Edn. dated 10.6.2008, which is produced as Ext.P3 herein.

2. The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 and Ext.P3 Government Order, on account of which, an objection has been raised by the Educational Authority regarding the approval of petitioners' appointment.

3. This court in a batch of cases, reported in Unni Narayanan v.

State of Kerala ( 2009 (2) KLT 604 ) held that without amending the statutory rules, a Government Order cannot be pressed into service. Ext.P2 herein, was under challenge in those cases. It was held that “if the vacancy is having a duration of one academic year or more, appointment can be made to fill up the same. The term of appointment need not be co-terminus with the term of the vacancy. If, in fact, the vacancy is having a duration of one academic year or more, even if, there is some delay in making the appointment, such appointment will have to be approved.” Ultimately, in para 12, a direction was issued as follows:

“12. In the case of the writ petitioners in these cases, orders, if any passed, approving their appointments on daily wage basis, relying on Ext.P2 Government Order are quashed. All appointments, whether pending approval or already rejected, shall be considered/reconsidered by the Educational Officers concerned and fresh orders shall be passed in the light of the declaration of law made by us in W.P.(C) No.25176 of 2008. The salary found due to be paid to the incumbents concerned shall be released immediately. The action in this regard shall be completed within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.”

4. In the light of the above, Ext.P2 to the extent to which approval is given only on daily wage basis is quashed. The second respondent will pass fresh orders in the light of the findings rendered by the Division Bench in the above decision, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the judgment of the Division Bench referred to above, before the second respondent for compliance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

ms The words “Sacred Heart U.P. School” occurring in the first sentence of the judgment dated 01/07/2009 in WP(C) 18331/2009 are corrected and substituted as “M.G.M U.P School” as per order dated

24/08/2009 in I.A 10472/2009 in WP(C) 18331/2009.

Registrar (Judicial)