IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 34914 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- THE MANAGER, NARIKKUNI AUPS, P.O.NARIKUNNI, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THAMARASSERY. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.T.T.MOHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 34914 OF 2008 (F) ==================== Dated this the 26th day of November, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the Manager of an Aided School. The controversy in this writ petition is regarding admission of 4 students in Std.1 during the academic year 2006-07. It would appear that following the verification by Super Check Cell, notice was issued alleging that the admission of the aforesaid four students was bogus. Petitioner submits that in response to the notice, explanation was furnished producing several documents and contended that admissions granted were genuine and that the allegation of bogus admission was incorrect. However, the DPI passed Ext.P3 order rejecting the contentions. 2. Against Ext.P3, petitioner filed a revision before the 1st respondent and that resulted in Ext.P4 order. A reading of Ext.P4 shows that none of the contentions raised have been dealt with and the main complaint of the petitioner is that they were not given an opportunity of hearing and thus, were deprived of a chance for producing documents and satisfying the 1st respondent of the genuineness of the admissions that were granted. 3. In view of the complaint of the petitioner that Ext.P4 was WPC 34914/08 :2 : passed without notice, I feel the matter needs to be reconsidered for violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, I quash Ext.P4 on the sole ground that the order was passed without notice to the petitioner or affording an opportunity of hearing. It is directed that the 1st respondent shall reconsider the revision dated 20/1/2008 mentioned in Ext.P4, with notice to the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity to make his representations and producing whatever documents that he wants to produce. Orders as above, shall be passed, in the manner as directed, at any rate within three months of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp