Kerala High Court
Sadandhen P.C vs The State Of Kerala on 9 June, 2022
WP(C) NO. 18714 OF 2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 18714 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:
SADANDHEN P.C.,
AGED 63 YEARS
SON OF CHATHU, RETIRED PEON, AIDED UPPER PRIMARY
SCHOOL, PALAKKODE, KOTHAKKURUSSI, CHERUMPATTAKKAVU,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 512 (RESIDING AT PALISSERY HOUSE,
MUNDOOR POST, PAZHAMUKKU, THRISSUR DISTRICT).
BY ADVS.
V.A.MUHAMMED
V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT ANNEXE II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 001.
4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 101.
5 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 101.
6 THE MANAGER,
AIDED UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, PALAKKODE, KOTHAKKURUSSI,
CHERUMPATTAKKAVU, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 512.
SMT. NISHA BOSE, SR. GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 18714 OF 2022 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner contends that being aggrieved by the non-regularization of
the suspension period from 03.02.2006 to 31.01.2007 and the non-grant of pay
fixation benefits, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P7 representation before the 1st
respondent.
2. Sri. M.Sajjad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted
that this Court while passing Ext.P2 judgment had ordered that the petitioner is
entitled to his pay and other allowances for the period from 27.12.2005 to
12.12.2007 and hence, he is entitled for regularisation of his suspension period. It
is submitted that the petitioner has submitted Ext.P7 representation and his limited
request at this stage is for issuance of directions to the 1st respondent to consider
the same and to take a decision within a time frame with due notice.
3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader. In the nature of the
order that I propose to pass, notice to the 6th respondent is dispensed with.
4. 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.P7 after affording an
opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the
petitioner herein or his authorised representative and the 6th
respondent.
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.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
NS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18714/2022
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE
PETITIONER DATED 06.08.1996 AND APPROVAL
RECORDED THEREON.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.
36215/2007 DATED 07.04.2015.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. (RT.) NO.
3121/2016/G.EDN. DATED 28.09.2016 OF THE
GOVT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE AEO,
OTTAPPALAM DATED 10.04.2021.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. D/883/2021 DATED
30.09.2021 OF THE AEO, OTTAPPALAM.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE DDE,
PALAKKAD DATED 22.11.2021.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE GOVT. DATED 22.05.2022.
(WITHOUT EXHIBITS)
RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS
