High Court Kerala High Court

Lukose George vs Sree Sankaracharya University Of on 30 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
Lukose George vs Sree Sankaracharya University Of on 30 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 9657 of 2009(B)


1. LUKOSE GEORGE, AGED 44 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE REGISTRAR, SREE SANKARACHARYA

3. THE VICE CHANCELLOR,

4. MR.DHINU M.R., AGE NOT KNOWN TO THIS

                For Petitioner  :SMT.SARITHA DAVID CHUNKATH

                For Respondent  :SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR

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

 Dated :30/06/2009

 O R D E R
                      T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      W.P.(C) No. 9657 of 2009-B
                   - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                Dated this the 30th day of June, 2009.

                                 JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this writ petition aggrieved by Ext.P6,

whereby the fourth respondent was assigned the charge of Head of the

Department. As per the interim order dated 1.4.2009, the operation of

Ext.P6 was stayed and respondents 1 to 3 were directed to put the petitioner

back in charge of the Head of the Department of Physical Education.

2. It is reported by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said

interim order has been complied with and the petitioner has been restored

the position as Head of the Physical Education Department.

3. In that view of the matter, no further orders are called for in the

writ petition. Learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submits that

this may not affect the future claims of the 4th respondent in terms of the

Statutes that will be in force from time to time. Learned Standing Counsel

for the University also submits that they will abide by the terms of the

Statute in force.

In the light of the fact that pursuant to the interim order the position

has been restored, it is unnecessary to set aside Ext.P6, since the petitioner

wpc 9657/2009 2

has already been restored to the position. Ext.P6 cannot therefore be

enforced against the petitioner.

The writ petition is closed.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

kav/