Akhilesh Chandra T vs The Director Of General Education
2021 Latest Caselaw 20556 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 20556 Ker
Judgement Date : 1 October, 2021

Kerala High Court

Akhilesh Chandra T vs The Director Of General Education on 1 October, 2021

WP(C) NO. 20738 OF 2021      1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
     FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 9TH ASWINA, 1943
                    WP(C) NO. 20738 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

          AKHILESH CHANDRA T
          AGED 48 YEARS
          S/O. APPUNNI NAMBIAR, PRINCIPAL,
          KUNHALIMARAKKAR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
          P.O.KOTTAKKAL, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

          BY ADV R.K.MURALEEDHARAN(K/330/1989)



RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
          (HIGHER SECONDARY), JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
          695014.

    2     THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
          OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER
          SECONDARY EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE-673004.

    3     THE MANAGER,
          KUNHALIMARAKKAR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
          P.O.KOTTAKKAL, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673521.

    4     ISMAIL P.,
          HSST, KUNHALIMARAKKAR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
          P.O.KOTTAKKAL, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673521.



          SMT.NISHA BOSE, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 20738 OF 2021                 2

                                     JUDGMENT

It is being aggrieved by the rejection of approval of the petitioner as

Principal in Charge of the Kunhalimarakkar Higher Secondary School, Kottakkal

under the Management of the 3rd respondent, that the petitioner is before this

Court seeking the following reliefs:-

(i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing Ext.P3 order dated 13.7.2021 and Ext.P4 order dated 18.8.2021 issued by the 2nd respondent; or in the alternative

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P5 appeal after hearing the parties in the light of Ext.P6 judgment within a time frame.

2. The petitioner contends that the school managed by the third

respondent was granted minority status by the National Commission for Minority

Educational Institution in the year 2010. When the principal of the school retired

on 31/05/2021, the manager appointed the petitioner as the principal. However,

the proposal was rejected by the second respondent and the DD Officer charge

was given to the fourth respondent.

3. Sri.R.K.Muralidharan, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner submits that the order passed by the 2nd respondent rejecting the

proposal for approval of the petitioner as the Principal of the School is clearly

against the principles laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in St. Pauls

Higher Secondary School v. State of Kerala [2020 (2) KLT 443]. The

learned counsel contends that being aggrieved by the order, the petitioner has

preferred Ext.P5 appeal before the 1st respondent. The learned counsel

submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if the 1st respondent is directed to

consider Ext.P5 appeal taking note of the law laid down by this Court in Ext.P6

judgment.

4. I have heard Smt.Nisha Bose, the learned Senior Government

Pleader and have considered the submissions advanced.

5. In view of the limited nature of the relief sought, notice to the party

respondents are dispensed with.

6. 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 at the admission

stage itself by issuing the following directions:

a) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the

assertions made in Ext.P5 appeal, there will be a direction

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

appropriate orders on Ext.P5 in the light of Ext.P6

judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard,

either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or his

authorised representative and the party respondents.

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

in any event, within a period of two 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.