IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 30252 of 2010(F)
1. THE MANAGER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
5. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :04/10/2010
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). NO. 30252 OF 2010 F
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of October, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the Manager of Koorikkuzhi A.M.U.P.School,
Kaipamangalam. It is stated that one day verification of the student
strength for 2009-10 was made on 14.7.2009 and thereafter, high
level verification was also held. In the one day verification, according
to the petitioner,the educational officer omitted to note that 68 private
study students were there in the School. On the basis of the one day
verification, it is stated that instead of 24 class divisions, only 18
divisions were sanctioned for 2009-10. Challenging non-grant of six
posts of LPSA/UPSA, the petitioner preferred appeal before the
Deputy Director of Education. The appeal was rejected as per
Ext.P5 order dated 30.3.2010. Challenging Ext.P5 order, the
petitioner has filed Ext.P6 statutory appeal before the Government.
Ext.P6 is pending disposal.
2. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:
W.P.(C) NO.30252 OF 2010
:: 2 ::
“(i) call for the records relating to Exhibits P2 and P5
and quash the originals of the same by the issue
to the extent they exclude 68 students towards
the staff fixation order of a writ of certiorari or
other appropriate writ or order.
(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate
writ order or direction commanding the
Department to revise the staff fixation order by
reckoning those 68 students who are excluded
from consideration.
(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate
writ order or direction commanding the 1st
Respondent to effectively consider and pass
appropriate orders upon Exhibit P6 after affording
an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner
within a time limit.
(iv) pass such other order or direction which this
Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in
the circumstances of the case.”
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, for the
time being, it is sufficient if Ext.P6 is directed to be disposed of by
the first respondent.
W.P.(C) NO.30252 OF 2010
:: 3 ::
Since Ext.P6 appeal is pending before the Government, I do
not think that it is proper to consider the contentions of the petitioner
on the merits. The Writ Petition is disposed of as follows:
a) The first respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P6
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
petitioner and any other affected party.
b) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and a
certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent.
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/