ANIL P.S. Vs. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P.(C)No.27938 of 2017 The petitioners claim that they were appointed as UPSAs in the 3rd respondent School in the year 1989 and 1991 and continuing in the school since then; but as per Ext P13 order the 2nd respondent has ordered their deployment, while teachers far junior to them are retained in the School. They are also challenging Ext P6 seniority list issued on 02.08.2017.

(2.) Petitioners have produced Ext P1 and P2 series of orders appointing them as UPSAs on various dates in 1989, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1997, 1999 and 2003. Producing Ext P3 seniority list of primary teachers of the schools as on 01.01.2006, issued on 28.03.2008, they claim that they were assigned seniority with effect from the date of joining in the school, correctly, from 06.06.1989, 12.06.1989, 30.06.1989, 17.07.1991, 01.06.1992, 06.07.1992, 06.06.1994, 06.06.1994, 02.06.1997, 17.06.1999 and 02.06.2003 respectively. The petitioners claim that in Ext P11 seniority list issued subsequent to that, as on 01.01. 2011 and in Ext P11 seniority list as on 01.01.2014, published on 22.12.2014 also, they were ranked correctly. But in the seniority list published as per Ext P6 proceedings, for each of the years from 01.01.2009 to 01.01.2017, they are not assigned seniority correctly. Despite the fact that they are the senior most UPSAs appointed in 1989, 1991, etc, they are not even included in the seniority list. It is alleged that the provisional seniority lists issued as per Ext P6 proceedings were finalised as per Ext P11 proceedings on 08.08.2017, without considering their objections. Ext P13 order is issued based on the said seniority list, deploying the petitioners 1, 4 and 6 to other schools. The writ petition was filed at this stage.

(3.) An interim order was passed on 23.08.2017, staying the operation of the seniority list.