Nasar Hussain v. The Manager
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/20TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 17316 of 2015 (l) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
-------------------------- NASAR HUSSAIN AGED 30 YEARS S/O. CHERIA ALI, JUNIOR LANGUAGE TEACHER (ARABIC) CRESCENT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, ADAKKAKUNDU, (VIA) NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S):
---------------------------- 1.
THE MANAGER, CRESCENT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL' ADAKKAKUNDU, (VIA) NILAMBUR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330 2.
DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WANDUR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 328 3.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 676 505 4.
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001 R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT. M.J. RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 17316 of 2015 (l) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- --------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 12.06.2012.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 03.06.2013. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DEGREE CERTIFICATE, ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE B.Ed. CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MG UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL // True copy // PA to Judge das
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 17316 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 10th day of June, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who was appointed as Junior Language Teacher (Arabic) for the period from 12.06.2012 to 31.03.2013, is aggrieved by the denial of approval on regular basis to the said appointment. It is the case of the petitioner that when the appointment was sent for approval, the educational authority did not approve the appointment on regular basis, but granted approval only on daily wage basis. Aggrieved by the said action of the educational authority, the petitioner has taken up the matter in further proceedings and currently, Ext.P5 revision petition is pending consideration before the 4th respondent. The limited prayer of the petitioner in the writ petition is for a direction to the 4th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 revision petition, after hearing the petitioner.
2.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ
-2W.P.(C). No. 17316 of 2015 petition with a direction to the 4th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 revision petition filed by the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after hearing the petitioner. While passing orders as directed, the 4th respondent shall take note of the contention of the petitioner that his case would be covered by the decision in State of Kerala v. Sneha Cherian [2013 (1) KLT 755]. sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das