Shaju Yohanan vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 12465 Ker

WP(C) NO. 8994 OF 2021

                                   1


                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
           TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 28TH VAISAKHA, 1943
                            WP(C) NO. 8994 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

         SHAJU YOHANAN
0




         AGED 48 YEARS
         S/O.T.M.YOHANNAN, HIGH SCHOOL TEACEHR (MALAYALAM), P.V.S. HIGH
         SCHOOL, PARAPPUKARA, THRISSUR, RESIDING AT THEKKETHALA HOUSE,
         PARAPPUKARA, THRISSUR-680 310.

          BY ADVS.
          REKHA VASUDEVAN
          SMT.ELIZABETH V.JOSEPH



RESPONDENTS:

     1      STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
            DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

     2      THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
            DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

     3      THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
            DEO OFFICE, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR-680 121.

     4      THE MANAGER, P.V.S. HIGH SCHOOL,
            PARAPPUKARA, THRISSUR-680 310.

               BY SRGP T. RAJASEKHARAN NAIR


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.05.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 8994 OF 2021

                                     2


                                    JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking directions to the respondents

to regularise the broken periods of service of the petitioner and to

reckon the same as qualifying service. The petitioner has submitted

Ext.P3 representation before the Government and seeks a

consideration of the same. It is submitted that Ext.P5 report has been

forwarded by the District Educational Officer to the Director of

General Education recommending the regularisation of the broken

periods of the petitioner's service.

2. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, I am of

the opinion that since Ext.P3 has been submitted by the petitioner

before the 1st respondent, it is for the 1st respondent to take an

appropriate decision in the matter.

There will, accordingly, be a direction to the 1st respondent to

take up, consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 representation preferred

by the petitioner with notice to the petitioner as well as the 4 th

respondent and after hearing them through any appropriate means WP(C) NO. 8994 OF 2021

including video conferencing within a period of three months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ext.P5, forwarded by

the DEO shall be taken into consideration while passing orders as

directed above.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SVP WP(C) NO. 8994 OF 2021

APPENDIX ANNEXURE/EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D.DIS B2-5574/06 DATED 31.07.2006 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(P) NO.29/2016/GEDN DATED 29.01.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.07.2019 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH APPLICATION FORM NO.13 DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B2-8141/2019 DATED 02.11.2019 SUBMITTED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B2-8141/2019(4929/20) DATED 23.10.2020 SUBMITTED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A1/112/2018-G.EDN DATED 28.04.2018 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.