IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 22ND APRIL 2008 / 2ND VAISAKHA 1930 WP(C).No. 13362 of 2008(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: PETITIONER ---------------------- THE MANAGER, AIDED MAPPILA LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL, EDAPPULAM,CHATHANGOTTUPURAM P.O., WANDOOR,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN SRI.ALAN PAPALI SRI.NISHIL.P.S. RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WANDOOR,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. M.MOHAMMED,KOLLAMPARAYIL HOUSE, CHATHANGOTTUPURAM P.O.,WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 13362 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 22nd April, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that he is the Manager of an aided Lower Primary School, who is aggrieved by the orders issued by respondents 2 and 3 to appoint the 4th respondent as the Arabic Teacher giving him the benefit of Rule 51A of the Chapter-XIVA KER. The petitioner submits that against the aforesaid orders petitioner has filed Exts.P4 and P5 revision petitions before the first respondent invoking the power under Rule 92 of the Chapter-XIVA KER. It is complaining of delay in the disposal of the said revision petitions this writ petition has been filed seeking an order for the expeditious disposal of the revision petitions. Taking into account the submissions made as above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P4 and P5 revision petitions filed by the petitioner. This shall be done within 8 weeks from the date of W.P.(C) No. 13362 OF 2008 2 production of a copy of this judgment. It is clarified that I am not expressing anything on the merits of the revision petitions filed. It is also directed that before orders are passed, notice shall be given to respondents 3 and 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the first respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Vi