V.V.Krishnadas vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 3475 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1945
                         WP(C) NO. 10268 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

             V.V.KRISHNADAS,
             AGED 80 YEARS,
             S/O JANAKI ANNAMMA, KARTHIKA HOUSE, ARUN GARDENS,
             KOLAZHI POST, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 010.

             BY ADVS.
             V.A.MUHAMMED
             M.SAJJAD
             P.A.JENZIA


RESPONDENTS:

     1       STATE OF KERALA,
             REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
             GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT ANNEXE II,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

     2       THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
             JAGATHY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 014.

     3       THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
             DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676 505.

     4       THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
             KIZHISSERY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 505.

     5       SMT.V.V.MALATHY,
             KOVILAKATH HOUSE, NEDIYIRUPPU P.O., KONDOTTY,
             MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673 638.

             SMT.SURYA BINOY, SR.GP


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   24.03.2023,   THE    COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.10268 of 2023                       2



                    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                 ---------------------------------------
                     W.P.(C) No. 10268 of 2023
                  --------------------------------------
              Dated this the 24th day of March, 2023

                                JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:-

i. call for Exhibit P-5 and set aside the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or appropriate writ order or direction ii. declare that the Petitioner is the senior most person to become the karnavar of the family and eligible to manager the School and its properties iii. writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction directing the 4th Respondents to approve the transfer of management of AUPS Puliyakode in favour of the Petitioner forthwith;

iv. writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 1st Respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P-7 with notice to the Petitioner in a time bound manner.

v. to dispense with filing of English translation of vernacular documents produced along with the Writ Petition. vi. pass such other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the circumstances of the case.

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration the learned

counsel for the petitioner submitted that, there may be a direction to the

first respondent to consider Ext.P7 within a time frame. The Government

Pleader submitted that, the Government already took a decision as evident

from Ext.P5 and no further revision is maintainable before the

Government. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, Ext.P5

is an order passed without hearing the petitioner and also without

considering Ext.P1, Partition Deed. I don't want to make any observation

about the merits of the case. If a representation is pending before an

authority, it is the duty of the authority either to dismiss or allow the same.

Here is a case, in which the petitioner has got a grievance that the

petitioner was not heard while passing Ext.P5 and hence Ext.P7 is

submitted. I think there can be a direction to the first respondent, consider

the same with notice to the petitioner and other affected parties and pass

appropriate orders in accordance with law.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following

directions;

(i) The first respondent is directed to consider and

pass appropriate orders in Ext.P7 in accordance

with law with notice to the petitioner and other

affected parties.

(ii) The above exercise shall be completed by the

first respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate, within four months from the date of receipt of

a copy this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed as above.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

ak

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10268/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO.1525 OF 1950 DATED 02.08.1950 OF THE SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, AREEKODE.

Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELINQUISHMENT LETTER EXECUTED BY SARASWATHY AMMA IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER DATED 25.01.2023.

Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.125/99/G.EDN DATED 03/06/1999 (ALONG WITH TYPED COPY).

Exhibit P-3 (a) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KIZHISSERY ADDRESSING THE V.V.BHARGAVI AMMA VIDE NO.B/247/2011 DATED 11/02/2011.

Exhibit P-3 (b) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KIZHISSERI ADDRESSING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM VIDE NO.B/2173/2011 DATED 22/07/2011.

Exhibit P-3 (c) TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KIZHISSERI VIDE ORDER NO.B/2173/2011 DATED 19/08/2011.

Exhibit P-4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 27/02/1993 IN O.P. (SUCCESSION) NO.30/1989 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, MANJERI.

Exhibit P-5 TRUE COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.3693/14/G.EDN DATED 20/09/2014.

Exhibit P-6 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.S.NO.241/11 DATED 04/02/2014 OF THE SUB COURT, MANJERI.

Exhibit P-7 TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DATED 01.02.2023.