High Court of KeralaWP(C)/12837/2015disposed of

The Manager v. State Of Kerala

2015-04-24Honourable Mr. Justice Anil K.Narendran4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/4TH VAISAKHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 12837 of 2015 (D) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------- THE MANAGER AGED 60 YEARS MALAYAMMA AUP SCHOOL, MALAYAMMA PO KOZHIKODE PIN-673 601 BY ADVS.SRI.JIJI THOMAS SMT.SMITHA MATHEW SRI.P.R.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENT(S):

--------------

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, M SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 303

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001

3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE 673001

4. MUHAMMED SAJEER K.K., LPSA MALAYAMMA AUP SCHOOL, MALAYAMMA PO KOZHIKODE 673601 R1 to R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.VINCENT K.C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 12837 of 2015 (D) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DARED 3.6.2013 EXT.P2: A COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER DATRED 9.5.2014 ISSUED BY THE AEO EXT.P2(A): A COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER DEATED 3.10.2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN W.P(C)708/2015 DATED 9.1.2015 EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 18.10.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- NIL /TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J ---------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No. 12837 of 2015 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th April, 2015

JUDGMENT

Petitioner, who is the Manager of the Malayamma A.U.P.Schol, Kozhikode, has appointed the fourth respondent as UPSA by Exhibit P1 order. Approval for the said appointment was rejected by the Assistant Educational Officer as well as the District Educational Officer as per Exhibits P2 and P2(a) orders. Now the matter is pending in revision before the second respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that Exhibit P4 revision is still pending consideration before the second respondent.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3. Considering the fact that Exhibit P4 statutory revision filed by the petitioner is pending consideration before the third respondent, I deem it appropriate to

WP(C).12837/15 dispose of the Writ Petition directing the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit P4 revision as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, with notice to the petitioner.

ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE vgs25/4/15