IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2009 / 14TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 37740 of 2008(P) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SREEDHAN. K.N., S/O.LATE K.K.NARAYANAN KAVAPARA KANAYUR MANA, MUDUR PO., VATTAMKULAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, EDAPAL. 3. THE MANAGER, CPNUP SCHOOL, VATTAMKULAM PO., PIN 679 578., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.MUHAMOOD T.T. R3 BY SMT.V.P. SEEMANDINI, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. SMT.S.KARTHIKA , MR.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN , MR.M.R.ANISON , MR.P.S.ABHISHEK, SMT.KAVYA P.PRASAD, SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI . THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/08/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 2145 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 37740/2008-P APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE IN RESPECT OF PETITIONER'S FATHER K.K. NARAYANAN. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16/5/2008 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIR SHIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY TAHSILDAR, PONNANI, DATED 06/01/2000. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 18/06/2008 OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06/08/2008 IN WP(C) NO. 22352/2008 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C/3955/08 DATED 23/10/2008 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) Nos. 37740/2008-P & 2145/2009-E - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT In W.P.(C) No.37740/2008, an applicant under Rule 51-B of Chapter XIV-A K.E.R. who is claiming appointment as a teacher, is before this court seeking to implement Ext.P6 by which the Assistant Educational Officer directed the Manager to appoint the petitioner. The same is under challenge by the Manager in W.P.(C) No.2145/2009. The manager has produced Ext.P6 copy of the appeal filed before the Director of Public Instruction challenging the order passed by the Assistant Educational Officer. 2. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.37440/2008 is the son of one late Shri K.K. Narayanan, who was functioning as an Assistant Teacher. He died while in service, on 2.6.1999. The petitioner is having the qualification Plus Two and T.T.C. Accordingly, he submitted an application, Ext.P2 seeking appointment in a suitable vacancy. The mother of the petitioner is a teacher in another school and apart from the petitioner, there is one more daughter who has given consent for appointment of the petitioner. wpc 37740/08 & 2145/2009 2 3. Pursuant to Ext.P5 judgment of this court, the Assistant Educational Officer passed the present order. It is contended by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.2145/2009 that none of the relevant aspects have been considered by the Assistant Educational Officer while rendering the decision. The learned Senior Counsel relied upon Ext.P4 argument notes submitted before the Asst. Educational Officer in support of the plea. Mainly, it is contended by the Manager in Ext.P4 that the claimant was not a dependent of the late father. At the time of death of the father, the mother was working as a U.P.S.A. in the very same school and now she is working in another school. It is therefore contended that the late father of the petitioner was not the sole breadwinner of the family and after the death of the father, the children including the petitioner were dependents of the mother who is working as a UPSA. It is also submitted that they are having other properties. 4. A reading of Ext.P5 order (Ext.P6 in W.P.(C) No.37740/2008) shows that none of the contentions raised by the manager who is the appointing authority, have been considered by the Assistant Educational Officer. In that view of the matter, the said order cannot be supported in law. wpc 37740/08 & 2145/2009 3 5. Therefore, Ext.P5 (Ext.P6 in W.P.(C) No.37740/2008) is quashed. There will be a direction to the Asst. Educational Officer to reconsider the matter after hearing the parties and an appropriate decision will be taken in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The contentions raised by the manager in Ext.P4 argument notes will be considered by the Asst. Educational Officer before passing fresh orders. In the light of the fact that Ext.P5 order stands quashed, Ext.P6 appeal will be struck off. The writ petitions are disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/