Vacancies in educational institutions lasting over an academic year require regular appointment procedures rather than interim daily wage approvals.

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is the Manager of Ezhuvanthala North U.P.School, Shornur. The subject matter of the writ petition relates to a challenge against the order of approval granted only on daily wage basis. A vacancy of an Upper Primary School Assistant arose on 06/10/2008, when an U.P.S.A, Smt.V.B.Latha left the service and in the said vacancy Smt.C.Jyothi was appointed by the petitioner. Ext.P4 is the order of appointment of Smt.C.Jyothi which was forwarded to the sixth respondent for approval and, approval in that regard was granted only on daily wages basis. Obviously, that order was passed in view of the Government Orders which were in force at that relevant point of time.

2. Presently, the matter is covered by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C).No.25176/2009 and connected cases, produced as Ext.P5 herein. The Government Order dated 10/06/2008, Ext.P3, was under challenge in those writ petitions on various grounds. It was held in paragraph (7) of the judgment that “the offending conditions in Ext.P2 Government Order cannot stand with the statutory rules. Therefore, for enforcing them, the relevant rules require amendment. As long as the rules are not amended, Ext.P2 cannot be pressed into service by the Government.” It was further held in paragraph (8) 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-terminous 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.”

3. The dictum laid down in the said judgment will apply to this case also. Therefore, the approval of Ext.P4 appointment order made on daily wage basis cannot be sustained. The Assistant Educational Officer, namely, the sixth respondent will therefore reconsider the matter in the light of the findings rendered by the Division Bench in Ext.P5 judgment and pass a fresh order. The writ petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the Assistant Educational Officer for compliance.

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

Sd/-

T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE ms

The name of “V.B.Latha” occurring in the fifth line of

first paragraph of judgment datd 09/06/2009 in W.P.(C). No.15826/09-W is corrected as “V.B.Likha” vide order dated

03/07/2009 in I.A.No.7920/09 in W.P.(C).No.15826/2009.

Registrar (Judicial)