P.S. Mani vs Director General Of Education

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8792 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 July, 2022

Kerala High Court
P.S. Mani vs Director General Of Education on 7 July, 2022
WP(C) NO. 15682 OF 2021           1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
     THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1944
                     WP(C) NO. 15682 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

          P.S. MANI, AGED 54 YEARS,
          S/O. SIVARAMAN, MANAGER,
          V.M. LP SCHOOL, PALAKKAPOTTA,
          AYILOOR P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
          BY ADVS.
          DR. GEORGE ABRAHAM
          JOBY D JOSEPH


RESPONDENT/S:

    1     DIRECTOR GENERAL OF EDUCATION
          JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014.

    2     ASSISTANT EDCUATIONAL OFFICER,
          KOLLANGODE, PALAKKAD 678 506.

    3     ANITHA. C.,
          HEADMISTRESS IN-CHARGE, V.M. LP. SCHOOL,
          PALAKKAPOTTA, AYILOOR P.O.
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 510.
          BY ADVS.
          V.A.MUHAMMED
          M.SAJJAD

          SRI. PREMCHAND R NAIR, SR. GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 15682 OF 2021                    2



                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that he is the manager of V.M.L.P. School, Palakkapotta. He has certain grievances against the 3rd respondent who is acting as Headmistress-in-charge of the school. The petitioner asserts that he has preferred Ext.P7 petition before the 1st respondent seeking initiation of appropriate action which is stated to be pending. The prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P7 and take a decision within a time frame with due notice.

2. I have heard Dr. George Abraham, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. M. Sajjad, the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent and the learned Government Pleader.

3. After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by issuing the following directions:

a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P7, WP(C) NO. 15682 OF 2021 3 after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or his authorised representative and the 3rd respondent.
b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent for further action. This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE NS WP(C) NO. 15682 OF 2021 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15682/2021 PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER APPOINTING THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS HEADMISTRESS IN-CHARGE.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, DATED 29.11.2013.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 9/3/2021.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVED SENIORITY LIST DATED 1/7/2021 OF THE SCHOOL.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE MEMO ISSUED BY THE MANAGER, TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF REPLY GIVEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16/3/2020.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 23/3/2021 .

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL