P.K. Jayanandan and Shaila P.V. vs The Secretary to Government, The Director of Public Instruction, The Deputy Director of Education and The Assistant Educational Officer

K.T. Sankaran, J.—The first petitioner is the Manager and the second petitioner is the Headmistress of Balanubodhini U.P. School, Methala, Thrissur District. The Assistant Educational Officer issued Ext.P1 staff fixation order after conducting one day visit. Later, the Super Check Cell visited the School on 15.9.2009. The petitioners allege that it was done on the basis of a bogus complaint. The Super Check Cell made a second visit on 9.12.2009. Based on the visits of the Super Check Cell, Ext.P2 order dated 22.5.2010 was passed by the Director of Public Instruction. On the basis of Ext.P2 order, the Assistant Educational Officer issued Ext.P3 revised staff fixation order for the academic year 2009-2010. Challenging Exts.P2 and P3, the first petitioner filed Ext.P4 Revision dated 12.6.2010 before the first respondent. Ext.P4 Revision is pending disposal. Meanwhile, on 18.9.2010, the Assistant Educational Officer issued Ext.P5 communication to the Headmistress directing her to furnish the details regarding the salary, scholarship, lump sum grant, etc. drawn by the four teachers, who were found surplus as per the revised staff fixation order.

The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:

(i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of Exhibit P4 revision petition filed by the 1st petitioner at the earliest after affording an opportunity of hearing to the 1st petitioner;

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents not to recover any amount from the 2nd petitioner in pursuance of Exhibit P2 order issued by the 2nd respondent; and

(iii) issue such other and further relief as this Hon''ble Court deems fit and proper to grant in the facts and circumstances of this case.

Since Ext.P4 Revision is pending before the first respondent, it is only just and proper to direct the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P4 Revision. It is also just and necessary to issue a direction not to make recovery of any amount from the petitioners on the basis of Ext.P5 till the disposal of Ext.P4 Revision.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows:

a) The first respondent shall consider and dispose of Ext.P4 Revision filed by the first petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners.

b) Pending disposal of Ext.P4 Revision by the first respondent, no recovery shall be made on the basis of Ext.P5 communication dated 18.9.2010 issued by the Assistant Educational Officer. However, the second petitioner shall furnish the details called for in Ext.P5 to the Assistant Educational Officer within a period of three weeks from today. A copy of the details furnished by the second petitioner to the Assistant Educational Officer shall be produced before the first respondent.

c) The petitioners shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent.

d) If the second petitioner fails to submit the statement as directed in Ext.P5 communication within the aforesaid period of three weeks, the direction not to make any recovery shall stand vacated without any further orders.