IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY TUESDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2011 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1932 WA.No. 2065 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.29185/2010 Dated 22/09/2010 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN WPC -------------------------------- 1. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, IDUKKI , THODUPUZHA-685 584. 2. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICE,THODUPUZHA-685 584. 3. STATE TEXT BOOK OFFICER, PADMAVILASAM FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY G.P. SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER IN THE WPC ------------------------------------ 1. CICILY.K.V,W/O.LATE KURIAKOSE, THAYYIL HOUSE,MUTHALAKODAM PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. THE UPA LOK AYUKTA,VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.(*) DELETED (SECOND RESPONDENT IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER ORDER DT.28.2.2011 IN THE WRIT APPEAL.) ADV. SRI.UNNIKRISHNAN.V.ALAPATT FOR R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2011, ALONG WITH WA NO.2066 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal Nos.2065 & 2066 of 2010 .................................................................... Dated this the 8th day of March, 2011. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Writ Appeals are filed by retired teachers against common judgment of the learned Single Judge in the same matter. The appellants' case is that school teachers were entrusted with the work of making note books through the students for sale. Even though books were made and kept ready in terms of the instructions, such books were not sold is the case of the appellants. According to the appellants, on account of failure to sell out the books, State has suffered loss. However, party respondents challenged the action to recover loss from them by the appellants, before the Lok Ayukta. As a matter of fact, the Lok Ayukta found that party respondents are not involved in causing any loss and books could not be sold because of inaction on the part of the appellants in fixing the price or giving indent for sales. Even though learned Single Judge found that Lok Ayukta does not have jurisdiction as such in the matter, the learned Single Judge did not want W.A.2065&2066/10 2 to interfere with the finding of fact entered by the Lok Ayukta based on which party respondents were exonerated. We do not find any ground to deviate from the view taken by the learned Single Judge because even if on technicality Lok Ayukta's orders are vacated, party respondents are free to approach this court challenging these very same orders and since the Single Judge has agreed with the findings of the Lok Ayukta, respondents would have got relief from this court. So much so, we do not find any merit in the Writ Appeals and are accordingly dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge BHABANI PRASAD RAY Judge pms