Kerala High Court
Divya P G vs The State Of Kerala on 6 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1944
RP NO. 557 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 14905/2019 OF HIGH COURT
OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER :
DIVYA P G, AGED 40 YEARS
D/O. GOVINDAN P, PADINJARATH PISHARAM,
CHITTILAPILLY P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 551.
BY ADVS.
BABU S. NAIR
SMITHA BABU
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 006.
3 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
KUTTIPURAM, PIN 679 571.
4 THE MANAGER,
KVUPS, VADAKKUMBARAM,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676 552.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
RP NO. 557 OF 2022
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
...........................................
R.P.No.557 of 2022
in
W.P.(C) No.14905 of 2019
.....................................
Dated this the 6 th day of July, 2022
ORDER
This review petition is filed seeking to review judgment
dated 14.03.2022 to the extent the liberty to challenge an
order issued by the Government on 21.04.2021 was not
reserved.
2. The writ petition was filed in the year 2019, seeking a
direction to implement the Government Order dated
14.02.2019 and for directions to issue orders of approval
of appointment of the petitioner. However, during the
pendency of the writ petition, the Assistant Educational
Officer issued an order rejecting the approval of the
petitioner, which was challenged before the statutory
authorities. All those challenges were rejected. Finally
by order dated 21.04.2021, the Government rejected the
revision petition filed by the Manager, thereby confirming
the order refusing to approve the petitioner.
3. Since the aforementioned order of 21.04.2021 was issued
RP NO. 557 OF 2022
during the pendency of the writ petition and the same
had given rise to a fresh cause of action, the writ
petition was requested to be withdrawn and the said
request was granted as per the order under review.
4. Review petitioner now apprehends that, since the
petitioner is not granted permission to file a fresh writ
petition, the review petitioner may be prejudiced if she
prefers a fresh writ petition challenging the Government
Order No.G.O.[Rt] No.2626/2021/Gen.Edn. Dated
21.04.2021.
5. I have considered the contention of the petitioner as well
as the learned Government Pleader.
6. Since the 4 th respondent and the review petitioner are
sailing together, notice to the 4 th respondent shall stand
dispensed with.
7. On a perusal of the judgment under review, I notice that
all what this Court had observed was that the writ
petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Since the present
grievance of the petitioner is with respect to a cause of
action that arose subsequent to the filing of W.P.(C)
No.14905/2019, notwithstanding the dismissal of the writ
RP NO. 557 OF 2022
petition as withdrawn, the petitioner is entitled to
challenge the G.O. dated 21.04.2021, if it is otherwise
permissible under the law.
8. However, since petitioner apprehends prejudice on
account of the withdrawal of the writ petition without
liberty to file a fresh writ petition, the review petition
shall stand allowed reserving the liberty of the petitioner
to file a fresh writ petition, notwithstanding the
withdrawal of W.P.(C) No.14905/2019.
The review petition is allowed as above.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AMV/06/07//2022
RP NO. 557 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF RP 557/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED , 4.6.2022
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS NO.
C/1049/2022.
RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES : NIL
TRUE COPY
