High Court Kerala High Court

Rajeesh P.K. vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 15 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
Rajeesh P.K. vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 15 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 10178 of 2009(N)


1. RAJEESH P.K., AGED 26 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,

4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

5. THE MANAGER, RAJAS A.U.P.SCHOOL,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :15/06/2009

 O R D E R
                   T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                        W.P.(C). No.10178/2009-N
                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                   Dated this the 15th day of June, 2009

                          J U D G M E N T

The petitioner herein was appointed as a part time Urdu Teacher with

effect from 02/06/2004. The vacancy arose due to the retirement of one

Sri.K.V.Damodaran, full time Urdu Teacher, on 30/06/2004. It appears that

the Manager appointed him only as a part time Urdu Teacher and that was

approved by the Assistant Educational Officer only on 14.07.2004. Again

the Manager submitted corrected proceedings before the Assistant

Educational Officer as per Ext.P3 appointing the petitioner as full time Urdu

Teacher with effect from 05/06/2006 and sought approval. The stand taken

by the Assistant Educational Officer is that in the light of the ban order

issued by the Government, full time post cannot be sanctioned.

2. The main prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the first

respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P8 revision before the

Government after hearing the petitioner. Along with I.A.No.6789/2009, the

petitioner has produced Ext.P12 revision petition dated 31/03/2009, filed

before the Director of Public Instructions. A direction is sought for to pass

urgent orders on the same, as otherwise, the delay will cause prejudice to

W.P.(C). No.10178/2009
-:2:-

the petitioner. Hence, there will be a direction to the second respondent to

take a decision on Ext.P12 after hearing the petitioner and other necessary

parties, namely, the Manager within a period of two months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

ms