Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 17554 Ker
Judgement Date : 26 August, 2021
WP(C) NO. 17213 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 17213 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
JAYASREE.L,
AGED 49 YEARS,
W/O.GOPAKUMAR, HST (HINDI), M.M.HIGH SCHOOL,
UPPOODU, EAST KALLADA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, RESIDING AT
PANDIKIZHAKKATHIL, PADINJATTEKKARA (PO),
THEVELAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
M.V.THAMBAN
R.REJI
THARA THAMBAN
B.BIPIN
ARUN BOSE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695014.
3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, (EDUCATION),
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION), KOLLAM,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691009.
WP(C) NO. 17213 OF 2021 2
4 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691009.
5 THE MANAGER,
M.M.HIGH SCHOOL, UPPOODU, EAST KALLADA (PO), KOLLAM
DISTRICT, PIN-691502.
SRI BIJOY CHANDRAN, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 26.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17213 OF 2021 3
JUDGMENT
Being aggrieved by Exhibit-P1 order, by which the appointment of the
petitioner as teacher-in-charge of the school was turned down, the petitioner
is stated to have preferred Exhibit-P2 revision petition before the 1st
respondent invoking Rule 92 of Chapter XIVA of the Kerala Education Rules,
1959. The petitioner seeks to quash Ext.P1 and also for a further direction to
the 4th respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as 'teacher-
in-charge' at M.M. High School, Uppoodu.
2. I have heard Sri.M.V.Thamban, the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and Sri. Bijoy Chandran, the learned Senior Government
Pleader.
3. Sri.M.V.Thamban submitted that though substantive reliefs are
sought for, the petitioner would be satisfied if directions are issued to the 1st
respondent to expeditiously consider Ext.P2 revision petition and take decision
within a time frame.
4. 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 Exhibit-P2 revision
petition, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either
physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her
authorised representatives 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.
The writ petition is disposed of.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE DSV
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17213/2021
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B2/23211 DATED 31.07.2021 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 06.08.2021.
RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!