IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 11TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27258 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. THE CHAIRMAN, GOVERNING BODY, SEETHI SAHIB MEMORIAL POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, POST THEKKUMURI-676 105, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. P.MANAF, PEON, S.S.M.POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, TIRUR, POST, THEKKUMURI-676 105,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, TRIVANDRUM-695 002. 3. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-670 020. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.27258 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT The first petitioner is the Manager of Seethi Sahib Memorial Polytechnic College, Tirur. The second petitioner is working as peon in the polytechnic. It is stated that the second petitioner commenced service in the school as watchman with effect from 1.11.2008 and his appointment as watchman was approved. While the second petitioner was working as watchman, a vacancy of peon arose in the school. The Manager appointed the second petitioner as peon, on finding that he was qualified as to be appointed as peon. Accordingly, he was transferred and posted as peon. The order was forwarded to the Regional Director of Technical Education, Kozhikode for approval. The proposal for approval was rejected as per Ext.P3 order dated 27.5.2010. Consequent on Ext.P3, Ext.P4 order was issued by the second respondent. The first petitioner has filed Ext.P5 appeal dated 23.6.2010 to the Government challenging Ext.P3 order. It is stated that Ext.P5 appeal is pending. W.P.(C) No.27258/2010 2 2. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following : “(i) call for the records relating to Exhibits P3 and P4 and quash the originals of the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order. (ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the third respondent to approve the appointment of the second petitioner as peon forthwith. (iii) declare that the second petitioner is entitled for approval of his posting as peon. (iv) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the first respondent to effectively consider and pass appropriate orders upon Exhibit P5 after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner within a time limit. (v) pass such other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the circumstances of the case.” 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that for the time being, the petitioners confine the relief to relief No. (iv). The request is just and reasonable. W.P.(C) No.27258/2010 3 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P5 appeal, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. The petitioners shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and a certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl