R.Kesava Das vs The District Educational Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 963 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

     MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 21TH POUSHA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.2803 OF 2011(A)


PETITIONER:

               R.KESAVA DAS, MANAGER, M.K.N.M.HIGHER
               SECONDARY SCHOOL, KUMARAMANGALAM PO, THODUPUZHA,
               IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 597.

               BY ADV. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
               THODUPUZHA,IDUKKI 685 584.

      2        THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
               DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

      3        THE STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE SECRETARY
               GENERAL EDUCATION(E) DEPARTMENT,
               GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

      4        MINI S.NAIR, HSA (MALAYALAM),
               MKNM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KUMARAMANGALAM PO,
               THODUPUZHA,IDUKKI DISTRICT, 685 597.

               R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER



               SRI. P.M.MANOJ - SR.GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD            ON
11.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.2803 OF 2011              2

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

impugning Ext.P8, as per which action under

Rule 7 Chapter III of the Kerala Education

Rules has been proposed against him.

2. I, however, notice that even though

no interim orders had been issued by this

Court in this writ petition, which is filed

as early as in the year 2011, no action has

been taken pursuant to Ext.P8 against the

petitioner until now.

3. I am, therefore, of the firm view

that on account of the efflux of time and on

account of the fact that the Government

themselves have chosen not to take any

further action based on Ext.P8 until now, any

such action will now require the petitioner

to be properly notified before it is taken

forward.

4. I am also persuaded to the afore

opinion because Shri.T.R.Harikumar, learned

counsel for the petitioner, submits that, in

fact, certain subsequent orders have been

issued and intervening events have happened

and therefore, that Ext.P8 cannot be allowed

to be operate any further.

In the afore circumstances, I order this

writ petition and direct that no further

action pursuant to Ext.P8 be taken against

the petitioner without properly notifying him

and without issuing proper proceedings for

the same; in which event the petitioner will

certainly at liberty to challenge such

proceedings/order, if he is so desirous.

For the afore purpose, I leave open all

contentions to be pursued in future, if so

required.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

MC/12.1.2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.53351/E3/03/G.EDN. DATED 19/12/2003 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G4/12291/04/K.DIS DATED 20.12.2004 OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, IDUKKI

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF ORDER NO.EM(4)/34938/2007/DPI/K.DIS DATED 21.12.2007 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A3/3262/94 DATED 5.3.1994 OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, IDUKKI

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A3/3262/94 DATED 31.8.1994 OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, IDUKKI

EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE G.O(MS)NO.20/82/G.EDN. DATED 15/2/1982

EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTES SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE G.O(RT)NO.5601/2010/G.EDN DATED 14/12/2010.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL


MC

                     (TRUE COPY)               PA TO JUDGE