Jaya.P vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 11366 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
   FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
                       WP(C) NO. 34167 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          JAYA.P., AGED 52 YEARS, W/O ANIL KUMAR,
          LECTURER IN CIVIL ENGINEERING,
          N.S.S. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, PANDALAM,
          PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN 689501.
          RESIDING AT KRISHNA KRIPA, NEAR CHITRA HOSPITAL,
          KURAMPALA, PANDALAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA,,
          PIN - 689501

          BY ADVS.
          AYYAPPAN SANKAR
          S.HRIDYA


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL
          SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION (C)
          DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

    2     DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,, PIN - 695023

    3     SENIOR JOINT DIRECTOR
          DIRECTORATE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023

    4     NSS POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, REPRESENTED BY THE
          CHAIRMAN, GOVERNING BODY, N.S.S. HEAD OFFICE,
          CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM,, PIN - 686101

    5     PRINCIPAL, NSS POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE
          MANNAM NAGAR, P.O. PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
          PIN - 689501

          SMT.PARVATHY.K -GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 34167/22
                                      2

                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner's challenge against Ext.P10 would have to be

acceded to by this Court on the short ground that she was not

heard before it was issued.

2. Sri.P.Gopal, learned Standing Counsel for the 4 th

respondent - 'NSS Polytechnic College', however, submitted that

the petitioner's challenge against Ext.P10 would not bear fruit,

unless the Government Order referred to as 5 therein is also

called into question. He submitted that he has no further

comment to make in this regard at this time.

3. Smt.Parvathy K. - learned Government Pleader, on the

contrary, argued that Ext.P10 is irreproachable and that it would

make no difference if the petitioner had been heard or otherwise.

4. I am afraid that I cannot find favour with the afore

submissions of the learned Government Pleader because the

imperatives of natural justice mandate that the petitioner be

heard before Ext.P10 had been issued, particularly when it causes

detriment only to her.

WPC 34167/22

In the afore circumstances, I order this Writ Petition and set

aside Ext.P10; with a consequential direction to the 3 rd respondent

- Senior Joint Director to reconsider the matter, adverting to all

contentions of the petitioner as voiced in this Writ Petition, after

affording her, as also the 5th respondent - Principal of the

College, an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an

appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously

as is possible, but not later than two months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

In order to obtain an expeditious compliance of the afore

directions, I direct the petitioner to produce a certified copy of

this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition, before the

3rd respondent; and the time frame afore will begin from the date

on which it is so received by the said Authority.

Sd/-

RR                                        DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                                JUDGE
 WPC 34167/22


                APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34167/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1          TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER

DATED 31.3.1997 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.H/2436/06 DATED 19.4.2006 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 22.8.2006 OF FIXATION OF PAY IN THE REVISED PAY SCALE Exhibit P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O. (MS) NO.134/2012/H.EDN DATED 5.5.2012, ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.10.2012 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O. (RT) NO.1855/2013/H.EDN DATED 7.9.2013 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.F/6264/2013 DATED 10.10.2013 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P8 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 7.10.2016, ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO 5TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P9 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 27.12.2016 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P10 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.DP6/898/15/DTE DATED 29.8.2022 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT