Mohammed Harshad.V vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 11338 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

                    WP(C) NO. 35148 OF 2022

PETITIONER/S:

            MOHAMMED HARSHAD.V
            AGED 27 YEARS
            PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER (UP SECTION),
            NAVAMUKUNDA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
            THIRUNAVAYA, MALAPPURAM - 676301.

            BY ADVS.
            AUGUSTINE JOSEPH
            TONY AUGUSTINE

RESPONDENT/S:

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

    2       THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
            UPHILL, MALAPPURAM - 676517.

    3       DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
            TIRUR, MALAPPURAM - 676101.

    4       MANAGER,
            NAVAMUKUNDA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
            THIRUNAVAYA, MALAPPURAM - 676301.

            SMT NISHA BOSE SR GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 02.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 35148 OF 2022

                                            2



                                     JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and within a time limit.

ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the 3rd respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner with effect from 13.9.2021 onwards.

2. When this matter was taken up for consideration, Sri. Augustine

Joseph, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that

challenging the refusal to grant approval, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3

revision petition before the 1st respondent and requests that direction be

issued to the 1st respondent to consider the same and take a decision

within a time frame with due notice.

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

Pleader.

4. In view of the nature of the order that I propose to pass, no

prejudice would be caused to the 4th respondent if notice is dispensed with. WP(C) NO. 35148 OF 2022

5. 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) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up,

consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, after

affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically

or virtually, to the petitioner herein or his authorized

representative and the 4th respondent.

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

any event, within four 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.

This writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

avs WP(C) NO. 35148 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35148/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 13.09.2021 OF THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 03.06.2022 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 16.09.2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.