IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930 WA.No. 687 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.33698/2007 Dated 14/02/2008 .................... APPELLANT/4TH RESPONDENT: ----------- THE MANAGER,M.I.S.M U.P SCHOOL, PENGAD KUNDIL PARABA,VENGARA SUB DISTRICT, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA SRI.T.V.VIJAYARAJAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SMT.SAJI VARGHESE,HEADMISTRESS, M.I.S.M U.P SCHOOL,PENGAD KUNDIL PARAMBA, KUNNAMANGALAM WEST P.O,A.R NAGAR,(RESIDING AT HAFZA QUARTERS,KUNNUMPURAM,KUTTOOR NORTH P.O, (VIA) A.R. NAGAR,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION (B) DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, VENGARA,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR) GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.SANDESH RAJA. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 687 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated 25th March, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. This is an appeal filed against an interim order passed by the learned Single Judge, by the 4th respondent in the writ petition. The appellant submitted that the learned Single Judge has passed a fresh stay order in the writ petition without adverting to his contentions raised in the counter affidavit, though there was a specific direction to that effect in W.A.No.237/2008. 2. The learned senior counsel Sri.K.Ramakumar, appearing for the 1st respondent, pointed out that the appellant did not raise any contention when the matter was taken for extension of stay and therefore, the learned Judge cannot be faulted for not having considered his contentions. 3. While disposing of the appeal filed against the interim order dated 15.11.2007, we issued the following direction in W.A.No.237/2008: “The writ petitioner will be free to move the learned Single Judge for appropriate interim orders and in that event the learned Single Judge shall consider the contentions raised by the 4th respondent in his counter affidavit also, while passing orders on the application of the writ petitioner.” WA 687/2008 2 The above direction binds us as well as the parties thereto. The learned Single Judge is also bound to follow the said direction. Apparently, the copy of the judgment was not available with the parties and therefore, the learned Judge did not have the opportunity to peruse the same. 4. In the light of the above judgment, the appellant is entitled to have his contentions in the counter affidavit considered by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, we order that the impugned order in this appeal, dated 14.2.2008 will remain in force up to 11.4.2008. The learned Single Judge shall endeavour to hear the prayer for interim relief before the said date and pass appropriate orders as directed by the Division Bench in W.A.No.237/2008. The Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. Nm/