IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 8634 of 2011(D) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- KUM. SREYA VINOD (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, C.R. VINODKUMAR, S/O. RAMAN NAIR, CHEERAMKAVIL HOUSE, EDAMATTOM.P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND SRI.T. NIKLAVU SMT.V.AJITHA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION) KOTTAYAM - 686 001. 3. THE ASISSTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KANJIRAPPALLY - 686 506. 4. THE MANAGER, HAJI K.H. KHAN MEMORIAL L.P SCHOOL, PONKUNNAM - 686 506. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.8634 OF 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 21th day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T In this writ petition filed by the petitioner represented by her father, the prayer is to allow the petitioner to write the annual examination in the school itself. Challenge is against Ext.P5 order passed by the Assistant Educational Officer. The petitioner is the only one student in Standard I and in the entire school. There is total lack of students in the school. It is mentioned in Ext.P5 that when an inspection was made in the school, it was found that the petitioner was not present in Class 1 and accordingly, the Assistant Educational Officer directed the student to appear for the examination by allowing her to join in any recognised school and the names of the schools have also been mentioned in Ext.P5. Even going by the averments in the writ petition, it can be seen that none of the divisions in the school are functioning for absence of sufficient number of students. The teacher-in-charge is the mother of the petitioner. W.P.(C) No.8634/2011 2 2. Earlier a report was submitted as per Ext.P1 which contains the details of the students who were there in 2009- 2010. The report shows that in 2009-2010, only one student got admission in standard No.1. It is evident from the report and the proceedings as per Ext.P2 that the salary of the teachers have not been sanctioned from July 14 especially since no class divisions have been sanctioned. 3. The teacher-in-charge approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.35378/2010 and by Ext.P3 judgment this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the Director of Public Instruction to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 representation. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the report of the Inspector is not correct and the student was there in the school for major part of the year and therefore, the student will have to be allowed to write the annual examination in the school. 5. It is a case where except the petitioner, no other students are studying in the school. Therefore, the Assistant Educational Officer has directed the student to be taken to any of W.P.(C) No.8634/2011 3 the recognised schools for writing the examination as otherwise she may lose further chance for study. None of the divisions have been sanctioned this year. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the challenge against Ext.P5. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp