Kerala High Court
Rajil T vs State Of Kerala on 1 September, 2022
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 10 TH BHADRA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 28572 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:
1 RAJIL T
AGED 29 YEARS
PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER (PET),
K.R. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAMERI,
PURAMERI POST, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673503.
2 REMYA K. P,
AGED 36 YEARS
H.S.T HINDI, K.R. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
PURAMERI, PURAMERI POST,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673503.
BY ADV POOVAMULLE PARAMBIL ABDULKAREEM
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001.
2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
JAGATHY, THIRUVANATHAPURAM-695014.
3 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673101.
4 MANAGER,
K.R. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAMERI,
PURAMERI POST, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673503.
SMT NISHA BOSE SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 28572 OF 2022
2
JUDGMENT
Petitioners state that they are working as Physical Education Teacher and HST (Hindi) in the K.R. Higher Secondary School, Purameri. They state that the 4th respondent Manager has submitted proposals for approval of their appointment, which are produced as Exhibits P1 and P2. Their grievance concerns the non-consideration of the proposals.
2. Sri. Abdul Kareem, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that the limited request is for issuance of directions to the 1st respondent to expeditiously consider Exhibits P1 and P2 proposal taking note of Exhibits P3, P5 and P6.
3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader as well. In view of the nature of the order that I propose to pass, notice to the 4th 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 Exts.P1 and P2 WP(C) NO. 28572 OF 2022 3 adverting to Exhibits P3, P5 and P6, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioners herein or their authorized representatives and the 5th respondent.
b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within four 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 avs WP(C) NO. 28572 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28572/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 06/08/2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 08/09/20221 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE GO (P)NO.19/2020/SJD DATED 25/08/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THE WIFE OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 18/04/2022 TO EXT.P4 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 03/11/2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN THE MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 08/11/2021.