N.S Santhosh Babu vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 17356 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 17356 Ker
Judgement Date : 25 August, 2021

Kerala High Court

N.S Santhosh Babu vs State Of Kerala on 25 August, 2021

WP(C) NO. 14345 OF 2021        1

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
   WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 3RD BHADRA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 14345 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          N.S SANTHOSH BABU
          AGED 41 YEARS
          SON OF SIVARAMAN, HEADMASTER, ALATHUR A.L.P. SCHOOL,
          P.O, ANANDAPURAM, (VIA) NELLAYI, IRINJALAKUDA,
          THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680305.

          BY ADVS.
          V.A.MUHAMMED
          M.SAJJAD



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL
          EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, ANNEXE II,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

    2     THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
          THRISSUR AT AYYANTHOLE - 680003

    3     THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
          IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680101.

    4     THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
          IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680101

    5     THE MANAGER
          ALATHUR A.L.P SCHOOL, P.O, ANANDAPURAM, (VIA)
          NELLAYI, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680305.



          SRI BIJOY CHANDRAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 14345 OF 2021                2

                                    JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that he was appointed as the Headmaster in

Alathur A L P School, Anandapuram with effect from 01.05.2020 on the

retirement vacancy of the previous Headmistress. He contends that the

approval for the promotion as Headmaster was declined by the AEO by Ext.P3

order. Though the same was challenged before the DEO, the order of the AEO

was not interfered with.

2. According to the petitioner, he being the senior-most teacher on

the rolls and having turned 50 years of age on 20.05.2020, he is fully qualified

to be appointed as Headmaster dehors test qualifications. Raising all the

tenable legal contentions, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P11 revision petition

before the Government. His grievance is that the delay in considering the

revision petition would adversely affect the petitioner and lead to hardship. It

is in the afore circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court with this

writ petition.

3. I have heard Sri.M. Sajjad, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and Sri. Bijoy Chandran, the learned Government Pleader.

4. It is submitted by Sri. Sajjad that his limited request is an

expeditious consideration of Ext.P11 with due notice to him. The learned

Government pleader submits that the revision petition can be heard and

disposed of within a period of three months.

5. 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) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the

assertions made in Ext.P11 revision petition, there will be a

direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and

pass appropriate orders on Ext.P11, after affording an

opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to

the petitioner herein or his authorised representative as well

as the affected parties, if any.

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in

any event, within a period of three 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.