High Court Kerala High Court

Shahul Hameed.K vs Sri.K.Abdul Latheef on 28 May, 2010

Kerala High Court
Shahul Hameed.K vs Sri.K.Abdul Latheef on 28 May, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 857 of 2010()


1. SHAHUL HAMEED.K, LAB ASSISTANT,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SRI.K.ABDUL LATHEEF,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED

3. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY

4. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN

 Dated :28/05/2010

 O R D E R
         C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.
                         ---------------------------
                        W.A No. 857 OF 2010
                         --------------------------
                 Dated this the 28thday of May, 2010

                           J U D G M E N T

Ramachandran Nair, J.

The appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single

Judge directing the Manager of the school to consider the

disciplinary proceedings against the appellant. The contention of

the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is that the appellant

was found to be involved in an act of indiscipline in as much as he

conducted a sit in strike in the school and the Director had already

imposed a punishment of warning. However, the Manager

approached the Government stating that higher punishment is

called for and he should be given the freedom to take decision.

Since the Government did not act upon the Manager’s appeal, he

came to this Court which upheld the Manager’s right to take

disciplinary action against the appellant. It is this decision that is

under challenge in this appeal.

2. The main contention raised by the counsel is that when the

matter is taken up for consideration by the Government in an appeal

by the Manager, he cannot simultaneously approach this Court to

W.A..No.857/2010
2

establish his right as manager. The counsel relied on the judgment

of the Division Bench of this Court in Saji Varghese v.

Mohammedkutty and Others (2009 (4) KHC 44) on the contention

that once the matter is pending before the statutory authority this

Court should not have interfered in writ proceedings. However writ is

an extra ordinary remedy and once the court proceeds to consider

the case on merits, there is no scope for allowing another authority to

decide the same matter which stands decided in a writ proceeding.

Therefore, we do not find any merit in the writ appeal.

Consequently the writ appeal is dismissed leaving it open to the

appellant to challenge the final decision taken in the disciplinary

proceedings initiated against him by the Manager.

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
(JUDGE )

P.S.GOPINATHAN
(JUDGE )
vps

W.A..No.857/2010
3

W.A..No.857/2010
4