Susruthan.A.P vs State Of Kerala on 28 March, 2003

Kerala High Court
Susruthan.A.P vs State Of Kerala on 28 March, 2003
       

  

  

 
 
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                        PRESENT:

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

    TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/6TH PHALGUNA, 1935

                                WP(C).No. 5570 of 2014 (U)
                                   ---------------------------

    PETITIONER(S):
    --------------------------

   1. SUSRUTHAN.A.P.,
      PEON, PALORA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
      ULLIYERI PO (VIA)KOYILANDI, PIN-673 620.

   2. N.K. VISWANATHAN NAIR,
      MANAGER, PALORA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
      ULLIYERI PO (VIA)KOYILANDI, PIN-673 620.

      BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM

    RESPONDENT(S):
    ----------------------------

   1. STATE OF KERALA,
      REPRESENTED BY SECRETARYTO GOVERNMENT,
      GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
      THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

   2. DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
      THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

      R1 & R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.A.FAYAZ


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
      ON 25-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
      FOLLOWING:

Kss

WP(C).No. 5570 of 2014 (U)
----------------------------------------

                                             APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
----------------------------------------

EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER, GO(MS)NO.79/2003/G
EDN.DATED 28-03-2003.

EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(MS)NO.18/1991/G EDN.
DATED 01-02-1991.

EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(MS)NO.299/2004 DATED
24-09-2004.

EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(MS)NO.354/2004/G EDN
DATED 26-11-2004.

EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 30-11-2013.

EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 4-1-2014 SUBMITTED BY
THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.


RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
-------------------------------------------           N I L




                                                              /TRUE COPY/




                                                              P.A.TO JUDGE

Kss



                   C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.

              -------------------------------------------------
              W.P.(c) No. 5570 OF 2014-U
              -------------------------------------------------
     DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2014.

                         J U D G M E N T

The 1st petitioner is a Peon working in the Higher

Secondary School of the 2nd petitioner-Manager. The school

was sanctioned with a Higher Secondary Section in the

academic year 2000-2001. The 2nd petitioner filled up 4

posts of Laboratory Assistants in anticipation of approval.

But the Government, by virtue of Ext.P1, had limited the

strength of Laboratory Assistants in the Higher Secondary

Section as two. Therefore the petitioner had terminated

service of two Laboratory Assistants. Subsequently, by

Ext.P3 order, the Government had accorded sanction

approving two additional posts of Laboratory Assistants

with respect to those schools where 4 Laboratory Assistants

continued, treating those posts as supernumerary. But the

benefit of Ext.P3 was denied to 2nd petitioner because there

were only two Laboratory Assistants working in the school

W.P.(c) No. 5570/2014 -2-

at the time when Ext.P3 order was issued. Aggrieved by

Ext.P5 decision taken by the Government in this regard, the

petitioners had submitted Ext.P6 before the 1st respondent

seeking re-consideration. Contention of the petitioners is

that, those schools which had continued with the illegal

appointments of two additional Laboratory Assistants are

now benefited. Whereas persons like the 2nd petitioner who

had terminated service of additional Laboratory Assistants

in compliance of Ext.P2 order has now been denied of the

benefit of Ext.P3. Learned counsel for the petitioners

submit that the petitioners will be satisfied by a direction

from this court to the 1st respondent for an early

consideration of Ext.P6.

2. Under the above mentioned circumstances, the

writ petition is disposed of by directing the 1st respondent

to consider Ext.P6 request submitted seeking re-

consideration of Ext.P5 decision and to allow the benefit of

Ext.P3 with respect to the school of the 2nd petitioner. A

decision on Ext.P6 shall be taken by the 1st respondent, if

W.P.(c) No. 5570/2014 -3-

necessary after affording an opportunity of personal hearing

to the petitioners, at the earliest possible, at any rate within

a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment.

Sd/-

C.K. ABDUL REHIM,
JUDGE.

AMG

True copy

P.A to Judge

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *