IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 19673 of 2007(P)
1. MUHAMMED FAZLULLA.S., AGED 24 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR.
3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR
4. THE MANAGER, AMLP SCHOOL, KAITHAVALAPPA,
For Petitioner :SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
Dated :27/06/2007
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER, J.
------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.19673 OF 2007
------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of June, 2007
JUDGMENT
Petitioner claims that he was appointed as Arabic Teacher in
the school under the management of respondent no.4 with effect from
June 5, 2006 in a retirement vacancy on a regular basis. However, his
appointment was not approved by the Controlling Officer for the
reason that approval of appointment of a senior teacher in the school,
namely Sri.Abdul Razak, is yet to be approved. It is pointed out by
the petitioner that the appointment of Abdul Razak is not likely to be
approved at all, since at the time of his reappointment he was over
aged. A perusal of Ext.P2 shows that the Director of Public
Instruction has already found that Sri.Abdul Razak’s appointment
cannot be approved. Therefore, there is considerable force in the
contention raised by the petitioner.
2. Anyhow, I do not propose to consider the merit of the above
contentions, in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel
for the petitioner at the Bar. He submits that the appeal preferred
against the order of the controlling officer was dismissed by
respondent no.2 and against that order he has filed Ext.P4 before
W.P.(C)No.19673 OF 2007
:: 2 ::
respondent no.1. Apparently respondent no.2 has passed Ext.P3
order without noticing Ext.P2 order passed by the Director on March
16, 2006. But the limited prayer made on behalf of the petitioner is
to issue a direction to respondent no.1 to take a decision on Ext.P4
expeditiously. Learned Government Pleader submits if Ext.P4 has
been preferred as contended by the petitioner, it will be heard and
disposed of without any delay.
In the above facts and circumstances, writ petition is disposed
of with a direction to respondent no.1 to consider and pass orders on
Ext.P4 strictly on its merit and in accordance with law as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to mention that
petitioner and all others who are likely to be affected by the order
that may be passed, shall be afforded sufficient opportunity to be
heard before any decision is taken on Ext.P4. Petitioner shall
produce a copy of the writ petition and a certified copy of the
judgment before respondent no.1 for compliance.
A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE
jes