The petitioner, appointed as UPSA in V.B.U.P. School, Poolany as per Ext.P1 order dated 01.06.2011, has approached this Court seeking for a direction to quash Ext.P8 order issued by the Assistant Educational Officer. By Ext.P8, the request for approving her appointment has been rejected on the ground that the remedy available to the petitioner is to file an appeal as already the appointment has been rejected and cannot be taken for reconsideration without permission of the appellate authority. 2. The facts involved in the above case disclose that as per order dated 28.08.2010 in respect of the academic year 2010-2011, the school was sanctioned eight divisions. The petitioner was accommodated on account of the availability of the said divisions. However, on a further inspection conducted, the same was reduced to 7 divisions as per order dated 28.12.2010. The W.P.C. No.25069 of 2014 2 petitioner's appointment was therefore not approved as per order dated 03.12.2011 issued by the Assistant Educational Officer by way of Ext.P4. However, the Manager preferred an appeal before the Additional Director of Public Instructions which is allowed as per Ext.P7 dated 25.06.2014 whereby Ext.P2 was restored. By virtue of restoration of Ext.P2, the petitioner again approached the Assistant Educational Officer for approving her appointment which resulted in Ext.P8 order.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader who submits that the remedy of the petitioner is to file an appeal against Ext.P8 order. As far as the Assistant Educational Officer is concerned once he has already rejected the approval of the petitioner's application, there is no reason for approaching the same authority, since the Assistant Educational Officer has no power to renew his order. But the factual circumstances involved in this case, apparently points out one fact. While issuing Ext.P4 order dated 03.12.2011 the position was that there was a W.P.C. No.25069 of 2014 3 division fall and therefore the petitioner did not have an opportunity to get approval. That situation had changed on account of Exts.P6 and P7 orders. Therefore, a fresh consideration of the matter is required in the light of the request made by the Manager as per letter dated 28.06.2014.
In the result, this writ petition is disposed of as under.
1. Ext.P8 is set aside.
2. There will be a direction to the Assistant Educational Officer to consider the application dated 28.06.2014 issued by the Manager for approval of the petitioner's appointment and the same shall be considered on merit after hearing the respective parties. Necessary orders shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge