The Manager vs The Asst. Educational Officer on 23 May, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 15297 of 2008(U)



1. THE MANAGER, AUP SCHOOL, PERAMBRA
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. THE ASST. EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PERAMBRA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :23/05/2008

 O R D E R
                              K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                      --------------------------------------------
                      W.P.(C) NO. 15297 OF 2008
                      --------------------------------------------
                      Dated this the 23rd May, 2008

                                  JUDGMENT

The third respondent in the Writ Petition was appointed by the

petitioner as UPSA with effect from 5.6.2006. The proposal for approval

of the appointment of the third respondent was rejected by the Assistant

Educational Officer as per Ext.P2 order dated 10.12.2007. The petitioner,

who is the Manager of the School, challenged Ext.P2 order in Ext.P3

appeal before the District Educational Officer. The District Educational

Officer, as per Ext.P4 letter dated 7.1.2008, directed the Assistant

Educational Officer to forward his remarks urgently. It is stated that the

Assistant Educational Officer has not complied with the direction in

Ext.P4.

2. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:

“a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or
direction, quashing Ext.P2 order of the 1st respondent dated
10.12.2007;

b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order
or direction, directing the 1st respondent to approve the
appointment of the 3rd respondent as per Ext.P1
appointment order forthwith and disburse the consequential
benefits or in the alternative;

c) direct the 1st respondent to send the remarks by the 1st
respondent as requested by the 2nd respondent within a time

W.P.(C) NO.15297 OF 2008

:: 2 ::

frame and further direct the 2nd respondent to dispose of the
Ext.P3 appeal after hearing the petitioner and the 3rd
respondent; and

d) issue such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
to grant.”

3. Since Ext.P2 order is challenged in appeal, reliefs (a) and (b)

cannot be granted. So far as relief (c) is concerned, there cannot be any

doubt that the Assistant Educational Officer should comply with the

direction in Ext.P4. Learned Government Plea