IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 32997 of 2006(C)
1. A.ABDUL RASHEED, MANAGER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED
... Respondent
2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.BOSE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :06/02/2007
O R D E R
K.M.JOSEPH, J.
------------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.32997 OF 2006
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of February, 2007
JUDGMENT
On a perusal of the main prayers, it would appear that
petitioner cannot have a complaint in so far as by way of
subsequent developments either they stand granted or it is refused.
In the case of first prayer, second prayer, an order is being passed
refusing to upgrade the school, which is challenged by the
petitioner in another writ petition and it is pending consideration.
So far as the fourth prayer is concerned, students were permitted
to appear for the second terminal examination. So far as third
prayer is concerned, the prayer is to receive fees for permitting the
students to appear for S.S.L.C. examination of March 2007 and to
comply with all formalities in that regard. Petitioner has produced
Ext.P18 which an order dated 19-01-07 as per which the students
have been permitted to take S.S.L.C. examination and granting age
WPC No.32997/07 2
exemption according to learned Government Pleader.
2. Therefore, I do not think that, in this writ petition
petitioner can have any further grievance. But learned counsel for
the petitioner is seeking an interim direction in I.A.No.1237/07 to
permit the X standard students of the petitioner’s school to appear
for the S.S.L.C examination from the petitioner’s school itself in
modification of Ext.P18 order. The validity of Ext.P18 is not in
issue in this writ petition. I do not think that petitioner can be
granted any prayer as sought for in the Interlocutory application.
Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. But I make it clear
that it will be without prejudice to the right of the petitioner, if he
is so advised, to challenge Ext.P18.
K.M.JOSEPH
JUDGE
sv.
WPC No.32997/07 3