IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 37451 of 2010(F) 1. MANAGER, H.L.P.S.MALESAMANGALAM, ... Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE ... Respondent 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, 5. SMT.LEENA.N., L.P.S.A., For Petitioner :SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN Dated :17/12/2010 O R D E R S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 37451 of 2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 17th day of December, 2010. J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is the manager of an aided school. He sought
approval of appointment of the 5th respondent, which was rejected on
the ground that there is a ban imposed by the Government against
new appointments. The petitioner’s appeal etc., were also rejected
on the same ground. The petitioner now submits that by Ext. P8 order
dated 12.1.2010, the Government has already lifted the ban and also
directed reconsideration of the cases already pending,
notwithstanding the fact that appeals/revisions are pending. The
petitioner therefore submits that it is only appropriate that the 4th
respondent reconsiders the matter of approval of the appointment of
the 5th respondent in the light of Ext. P8.
2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits
that the claim can be reconsidered, provided the petitioner is
prepared to furnish a bond undertaking to appoint a protected
Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with a
direction to the 4th respondent to reconsider the question of approval
of appointment of the 5th respondent in the light of Ext. P8 as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of
being heard to the petitioner as well as the 5th respondent.
Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.