IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 16805 of 2009(U)
1. THE CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. GOVT. OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
5. MARY P.M., W/O.NAISAL GEORGE,
6. DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION),
For Petitioner :SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL
For Respondent :SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :23/06/2009
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No.16805 of 2009-U
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2009.
JUDGMENT
Shri K.T. Syamkumar takes notice for the 5th respondent
The matter in dispute is regarding an appointment to the post of High
School Assistant in one of the schools managed by the petitioner herein. A
vacancy arose in the post of H.S.A. Social Science in St. Albert’s High
School, Ernakulam. It is the case of the petitioner that the 5th respondent
was mistakenly appointed. She was rank No.37 in the ranked list, whereas
one Ms. Julie K.J., who was rank No.29, should have been appointed as
H.S.A. Even though the proposal was forwarded to the District Educational
Officer, after being aware of the mistake committed, the District
Educational Officer was requested to return the proposal for rectifying the
mistake. The District Educational Officer returned the same by Ext.P1.
2. There were various proceedings in between the petitioner and the
5th respondent before this court and before the District Educational Officer
and Deputy Director of Education. Ultimately, the Deputy Director of
Education has passed Ext.P2 order whereby the Manager was directed to
take necessary lien adjustment in respect of Shri A.D. Antony by retaining
wpc 16805/2009 2
his lien in High School of Kothad from 10.7.2006 onwards and follow up
actions were also directed. This was challenged in Writ Petition
No.3016/2009 wherein this court directed the petitioner to avail the
statutory remedy of revision under Rule 92 of Chapter XIV K.E.R. Ext.P4
is the revision petition filed by the petitioner before the Government,
wherein the petitioner has sought for an interim order of stay of operation
of the order passed by the Deputy Director of Education.
3. It is stated that no orders have been passed on the revision petition
even though learned counsel for the 5th respondent submitted that to his
knowledge the stay petition has been rejected. Presently, the Manager is
faced with Exts.P6 and P7 whereby the Deputy Director of Education has
directed him to comply with the order Ext.P2.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent and learned
Govt. Pleader submitted that the 5th respondent has filed a Contempt of
Court Case No.732/2008 against the former District Educational Officer and
the said matter is pending. Whatever that be, the present prayer of the
petitioner is mainly for an expeditious disposal of Ext.P4 revision petition
pending before the Government.
5. Since the revision petition has been filed by the petitioner as
directed in Ext.P3 judgment of this court, the same has to be disposed of
wpc 16805/2009 3
after hearing the respective parties. Therefore, there will be a direction to
the first respondent to take a decision on Ext.P4 after hearing the petitioner
and the 5th respondent, within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/