High Court of KeralaWP(C)/16112/2015disposed of

K.V.Sayed Mohammed v. State Of Kerala

2015-06-04Honourable Dr. Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/14TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).NO. 16112 OF 2015 (L) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

--------------- K.V.SAYED MOHAMMED AGED 81 YEARS KALLIVALAPPIL, TRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 679 534. BY ADVS.SRI.P.RAVINDRAN (SR.) SRI.SREEDHAR RAVINDRAN RESPONDENT(S):

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

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

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS THIRUVANAHTAPURAM 695 001.

3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OTTAPALAM 679 101.

4. COL (RETD) M.SUKUMARAN MANAGER DR.K.B.MENON MEMORIAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT RESIDING AT CHANDRIKA SADAN, MEZHATHUR, THRITHALA PALAKKAD 678 115.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.J.RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).NO. 16112 OF 2015 (L) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------- P1- TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 21.8.2013 IN W.A.NO.741/13 P2- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.7.2014 IN W.A.NO.741/2013 P3- TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DATED 24.4.2015 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:NIL ------------------------ //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

............................................................. W.P.(C).No.16112 of 2015 ............................................................. Dated this the 4th day of June, 2015 J U D G M E N T In connection with a dispute regarding the Manager of the Thrithala Higher Secondary School, and pursuant to a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, the 2nd respondent was to consider a revision petition that was filed by the petitioner against the order of the District Educational Officer that approved the 4th respondent as the Manager of the School. The 2nd respondent passed an order declining to interfere in the matter. Against this order of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 revision petition before the 1st respondent. The limited prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 revision petition within a stipulated time limit.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ

W.P.(C).No.16112 of 2015 petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 revision petition preferred by the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns