E.K.Sreedharan Nair vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 1652 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

     FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 25TH POUSHA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.12023 OF 2012(C)


PETITIONER:

               E.K.SREEDHARAN NAIR, MANAGER,
               PAVANDOOR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
               PAVANDOOR P.O., KOZHIKODE - 673 613.

               BY ADV. SRI.M.VIJAYAKUMAR

RESPONDENTS:

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

      2        THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
               KOZHIKODE - 673001.

      3        THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
               KOZHIKODE - 673001.

      4        THE MANAGER, DAWN PUBLIC SCHOOL, THALAKKULATHUR,
               EDAKKARA, KOZHIKODE - 673613.

               BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS
                        SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
                        SRI.P.GOPINATH
                        SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
                        SRI.P.M.MANOJ - SR.GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD         ON
15.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.12023 OF 2012(C)

                                       -2-

                                JUDGMENT

Dated this the 15th day of January 2021

The petitioner has approached this Court

seeking that Ext.P3, which recommends the grant of

recognition to the third respondent be set aside and

the fourth respondent be directed not to grant such

benefit.

2. I notice that this writ petition was filed

as early as in the year 2012; but that the

petitioner has not been able to secure any interim

orders for the last eight years, when this matter

has been pending on the files of this Court.

Therefore, I am certain in my mind that this

matter has become infructuous, particularly because,

it is possible that the fourth respondent has

already been granted recognition, in which event,

the petitioner will have to challenge the same in

terms of law.

In the afore circumstances, the writ petition

is closed without any further orders.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE akv WP(C).No.12023 OF 2012(C)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION DATED 19/12/2011.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE PARENT TEACHERS ASSOCIATION UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT BEFORE THE DISTRICT INFORMATION OFFICER DATED 07/02/2012.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 05/03/2012.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR GOVERNMENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE