Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

P.D.Ajithkumar vs The State Of Kerala on 29 June, 1995

       

  

  

 
 
                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                              PRESENT:

                         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

                      FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2013/3RD JYAISHTA 1935

                                     WP(C).No. 13019 of 2013 (B)
                                        ----------------------------

PETITIONER :
--------------------

            P.D.AJITHKUMAR,
            SON OF P.P.DIVAKARAN, AGED 42 YEARS,
            PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER
            (GOVERNMENT U.P.SCHOOL, PERAMBRA, BRC-PERAMBRA)
            P.O.PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT)

            BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
                          SRI.K.E.HAMZA

RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------

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

        2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
            JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

        3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
            PERAMBRA, P.O.PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673525.

            R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. A. LOWSY


            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
            ON 24-05-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


Mn

                                                                            ...2/-

WP(C).No. 13019 of 2013 (B)
----------------------------------------

                                                     APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
-------------------------------------

EXHIBIT P1:          COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 29.6.1995 OF THE
                     PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P2:          COPY OF THE GO(MS)NO.113/2000/G.EDN. DATED 6.4.2000 OF THE
                     GOVERNMENT.

EXHIBIT P3:          COPY OF THE CIRCULAR OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
                     DATED 30.3.2004.

EXHIBIT P4:          COPY OF THE GO(MS)NO.307/2004/G.EDN. DATED 4.10.2004 OF THE
                     GOVERNMENT.

EXHIBIT P5:          COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.14944/2009-K DATED 18.1.2012.

EXHIBIT P6:          COPY OF THE GO(RT)NO.4446/2012/G.EDN. DATED 20.09.2012 OF THE
                     GOVERNMENT.

EXHIBIT P7:          COPY OF THE GO(RT)NO.3304/2012/G.EDN. DATED 11.7.2012 OF THE
                     GOVERNMENT.

EXHIBIT P8:          COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER
                     FOR EDUCATION DATED 1.4.2013.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :                        NIL
----------------------------------------------------

                                                                         //TRUE COPY//



                                                                        P.S. TO JUDGE

Mn-



                   THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.
           ====================================
                   W.P(C) No.13019 of 2013
           ====================================
              Dated this the 24th day of May, 2013

                         J U D G M E N T

The petitioner was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in Brindavanam Aided Upper Primary School with effect from 29.06.1995. He sought regularization which was rejected. Appeal and revisions arising therefrom were also rejected. Petitioner has sought a review of Ext.P6, order by filing Ext.P8, review petition.

2. The learned counsel submits that similar benefits are given to similarly placed persons as seen from Exts.P2 to P4.

3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that Exts.P2 and P3 are on compassionate ground. It is also submitted that challenging rejection of the appeal, petitioner had approached this Court and this Court directed the petitioner to move the Government in revision. It is accordingly that petitioner moved by way of revision. According to the learned Government Pleader, the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for and there is nothing to review Ext.P6, order.

4. It is not necessary for this Court to go into the W.P(C) No.13019 of 2013 -: 2 :- contentious issues the parties have raised. If Ext.P8, review petition is pending before the Government the same has to be disposed of at the earliest.

Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as under:

(i) If the 1st respondent is in receipt of Ext.P8, review petition, the same shall be disposed of as early as possible and at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
(ii) Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment and Writ Petition before the 1st respondent at the earliest.

THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.

vsv