High Court Kerala High Court

K.P.Nusrath Beegum vs The State Of Kerala on 29 January, 2009

Kerala High Court
K.P.Nusrath Beegum vs The State Of Kerala on 29 January, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 3097 of 2009(R)


1. K.P.NUSRATH BEEGUM, AGED 25 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,

3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

5. K.P.ABDUL SATHAR, MANAGER, A.M.U.P.S.

6. P.SUSEENA, ASSISTANT TEACHER,

7. MINU DHAMODHARA, ASSISTANT TEACHER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :29/01/2009

 O R D E R
               T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J.
                      -------------------------
                  W.P ( C) No.3097 of 2009
                     --------------------------
              Dated this the 29th January,2009

                       J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is one of the legal heirs of

Sri.K.P.Moideenkutty. A.M.U.P. School Vadakkangara is

is an aided school which was under the ownership and

management of Sri.K.P.Moideenkutty. Exhibit-P1 is a

partition deed executed between certain legal heirs.

Earlier the members of the Educational Agency

appointed Sri.K.P.Mohammed as the Manager, which was

approved by the Department. According to the petitioner

Exhibit-P1 is a deed which has the effect of a constitution

and bye-laws till the constitution and bye-law are

prepared and approved by the Department. Petitioner is

aggrieved by Exhibit-P8 order by which her request for

getting appointment was rejected. Aggrieved by Exhibit-

P8, she has filed Exhibit-P9 before the Director of Public

Instructions. Petitioner seeks for a direction to the

Director of Public Instruction to hear and dispose of

W.P ( C) No.3097 of 2009
2

Exhibit-P9 within a specified time limit.

2. Since Exhibit-P9 is an appeal which is filed

under the relevant statutory provision, the same has to be

disposed of, in accordance with law, after hearing the

respondents therein. Second respondent will accordingly

hear and dispose of Exhibit-P9 within a period of three

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment

after hearing the petitioner and the respondents in

Exhibit-P9 appeal.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE)
ma

W.P ( C) No.3097 of 2009
3

W.P ( C) No.3097 of 2009
4