High Court of KeralaWP(C)/34197/2015disposed of

Renjini S.Nair v. The Director Of Public Instructions

2015-11-12Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/21ST KARTHIKA, 1937 WP(C).No. 34197 of 2015 (Y) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- RENJINI S.NAIR, UPSA, NSSHSS, VARAPPATTY MUVATTUPUZHA.

BY ADVS.SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.) SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI RESPONDENT(S):

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

1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.

2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION ERNAKULAM - 682 030.

3. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER KOTHAMANGALAM - 686 691.

4. THEGENERAL MANAGER, N.S.S SCHOOL, PERUNNAI P.O., CHANGANASSERY - 686 102. R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S. JAMAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 34197 of 2015 (Y) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT. P1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF APPOINTMENT NO. A1/6034/2012 DATED 30/07/2012 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B3/4936/2012/K.DIS DATED 25/04/2014 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXT.P3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B4/9137/14/K.DIS DATED 01/01/2015 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P4TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT MANAGER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT ON 05/02/2015.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE.

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

===================== W.P.(C) No.34197 of 2015 - Y ====================== Dated this the 12th day of November, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is aggrieved with the non-consideration of Ext.P4 revision filed before the 1st respondent. The revision is filed on 05.02.2015.

2. In such circumstance, the 1st respondent definitely will have to look at the revision filed before it and consider the same in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing, to the petitioner as well as the Manager, the 4th respondent herein, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of hearing. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations on merits, which the 1st respondent will consider, in accordance with law.

The writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB/12/11/2015 // true copy // P.A to Judge.