Vilasiniamma K.C., High School vs Director of Public Instruction and Departmental Promotion Committee

K.T. Sankaran, J.—The petitioner is working as High School Assistant (Mathematics) in General Education Department. In the final seniority list of High School Assistants in General Education Department for the period from 1.1.1986 to 31.12.1990, the petitioner was included as Serial No. 172. According to the petitioner, on the basis of her seniority, she was entitled to have her name included in the select list for appointment to the category of Heads of High/Training Schools and Assistant Educational Officers for the year 2010 - 2011. The Departmental Promotion Committee (Lower) met and Ext.P2 notification dated 17.4.2010 was published. The name of the petitioner was not included in Ext.P2. According to the petitioner, the immediate senior of the petitioner and the immediate junior of the petitioner were promoted, by Ext.P3. Ext.P4 representation dated 25.6.2010 was submitted by the petitioner to the Director of Public Instruction pointing out the denial of promotion to the petitioner and expressing her grievance. It is stated that even subsequent to the submission of Ext.P4, several persons who are juniors to the petitioner were promoted as per the order dated 3.8.2010. In these circumstances, the petitioner submitted Ext.P5 representation dated 11.8.2010 to the Director of Public Instruction. The petitioner also got information under the Right to Information Act as evidenced by Exts.P6 and P7. It is submitted that Ext.P7 would disclose that the confidential reports in respect of the petitioner were available to the Departmental Promotion Committee before its meeting. According to the petitioner, by a mistake, her name was not included in Exhibit P2. It is pointed out that the Departmental Promotion Committee erroneously thought that the petitioner was a Higher Secondary School Teacher, which she never was. In the representations, she has pointed out all these facts.

The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner are the following :

(i) declare that the supersession of the petitioner from Ext.P2 and consequent denial of promotion are illegal.

(ii) call for the records leading to Ext.P2 and quash the same to the extent the petitioner is superseded from it, by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction.

(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to promote the petitioner to the category of Heads of High/Training Schools and Assistant Educational Officers with retrospective effect from 25.5.2010 with all consequential service and monetary benefits within a time limit to be fixed by this Hon''ble Court.

and

(iv) grant such other reliefs as this Hon''ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case including the costs of this Writ Petition (Civil).

A statement dated 27th September, 2010 was filed on behalf of the first respondent. The statement reads as follows:

Petitioner is working as H.S.A. in Govt. Girls'' H.S., Malappuram. Her seniority number is 172 in the seniority list of HSAs for the period from 1.1.1986 to 31.12.1990 issued vide order No. Sy(1) 69394/2006/DPI dated 13.2.2009. As per this office circular No. D6/001/2010/DPI, dated 1.1.2010 this office has called for the Confidential Report for promotion of staff of Teaching and Non Teaching Branch in the General Education Department. It is also informed that the confidential report should be submitted to the Director of Public Instruction on or before 20.1.2010. Subsequently, the Departmental Promotion Committee held on 29.3.2010 decided not to consider the HSAs who have not furnished their Confidential Reports for the last three years ending on 31.12.2009. She has submitted the Confidential Report dated 25.3.2009 for two years i.e, 1.1.2007 to 31.12.2007 and 1.01.2008 to 31.12.2008. She has not submitted the Confidential Report for the period from 1.1.2009 to 31.12.2009. So the committee has not included her name in the select list of HSAs for promotion. Subsequently, she submitted the Confidential Report dated 26.5.2010 for the last three years ending on 31.12.2009 and the Adhoc DPC (Lower) conducted on 4.8.2010 decided to include petitioner in the select list for promotion as Sl. No. 12. As the General Election 2010 for the LSGD Institutions declared, the promotion/transfer and postings are banned by Government. Action will be taken to promote the petitioner after the completion of the process of General Election 2010.

In view of the facts disclosed in the statement, it is not necessary to grant the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner as it is conceded that she is entitled to promotion and that she must have been promoted earlier. Since the election to the local bodies is scheduled to be held in October, 2010, it is submitted that a posting cannot be given to the petitioner after promoting her, until the election is over. The submission made on behalf of the respondents is just and reasonable.

However, the learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the petitioner was entitled to be promoted much earlier and her juniors having been promoted, there is no justification to deny promotion and posting immediately after the election is over. The petitioner is justified in making that submission, particularly, in view of the fact that she is to retire from service on 31.3.2011.

The Writ Petition is disposed of recording the statement filed on behalf of the first respondent. The petitioner shall be given promotion and she shall be posted accordingly on or before 15th November, 2010 with effect from the date from which she should have been promoted. Consequential orders shall also be issued without delay.