IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 310 of 2009(J)
1. DR.N.RAVEENDRAN, SREE RAGAM,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
... Respondent
2. MANAGER, S.N.COLLEGES, S.N.TRUST OFFICE,
3. PRINCIPAL, S.N.COLLEGE,
4. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
5. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
For Petitioner :SRI.RAJU K.MATHEWS
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :05/01/2009
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 310 OF 2009 J
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th January, 2009
JUDGMENT
The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:
“(i) to call for the records relating to Exhibit P8 order of
the 1st respondent and to quash the same to the
extend it adversely affects him by the issuance of a
writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, direction or
order;
(ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate
writ direction or order directing the respondents 1 to
3 to fix the pay of the petitioner, in terms of Exhibits
P3, P9, P9(a) and P10 orders and grant him all
consequential benefits including arrears of pay and
other allowances;
(iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate
writ, direction or order directing the respondents to
fix the pay of the petitioner in the category of
Principal (Professor Grade) with effect from
6.10.1998 and to pay him all consequential benefits
including arrears of pay and other allowances from
6.10.1998 to 25.3.2004;
(iv) to issue such other writ, direction or order as this
Honourable Court deems just and proper.”
2. Learned Government Pleader as well as Sri.A.N.Rajan Babu,
learned counsel appearing for the third respondent, submitted that the
petitioner can very well challenge Ext.P8 order in a representation before
the Government.
W.P.(C) NO. 310 OF 2009
:: 2 ::
3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it may not be proper
for this Court to consider all the questions involved in the Writ Petition and
it is only proper if the petitioner challenges Ext.P8 order before the
Government. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that if a
representation is filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P8 order within a
period of one month, the Government will consider the same without
much delay. The above submission is recorded.
Leaving open the right of the petitioner to challenge Ext.P8 order in
a representation before the Government, the Writ Petition is closed.
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/