IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 25TH BHADRA 1931 WA.No. 2029 of 2009 --------------------- (against judt. dt.18.8.2009 in W.P.(C) No.17240 of 2007-B) APPELLANT(S): ADDITIONAL 7TH RESPONDENT IN THE WP(C) ------------------------- ADOLF FREDY LOPEZ, S/O.LATE FREDY M.LOPEZ, SANTHI NIVAS, MURUKKUMPUZHA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 302. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAGUNATHAN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 6 IN THE WP(C) ------------------------- 1. SHRI.NAVEEN CHRISTOPHER, CLERK, ST.AUGUSTINE'S HIGH SCHOOL, MURUKKUMPUZHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 302. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 036. 4. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 5. MANAGER, ST.AUGUSTINE'S HIGH SCHOOL, KURUKKUMPUZHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 302. 6. HEADMISTREES, ST.AUGUSTINE'S HIGH SCHOOL, MURUKKUMPUZHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 302. 7. BULA FATHIMA LOPEZ, "RESMI", MURUKKUMPUZHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695302. (VOLUNTARILY RETIRED CLERK, ST.AUGUSTINE'S HIGH SCHOOL, MURUKKUMPUZHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695302). R1 BY ADV. SRI. S.P. ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE & ADV. SRI.N. SANTHA. R2 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. R. BINDU. R5 BY ADV. SRI. P. SANTHOSH KUMAR (Panampilly Nagar). THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------ W.A.No.2029 of 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this, the 16th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant was the additional seventh respondent in the writ petition. According to him, he is a member of the Managing Board of the St.Augustine's High School, Murikkumpuzha, Thiruvananthpauram. The fifth respondent herein/fourth respondent in the writ petition has appointed the first respondent/writ petitioner as a clerk in the school, without the consent of the Managing Board and therefore, the said appointment is invalid. In the judgment under appeal, the learned Single Judge has directed the District Educational Officer to reconsider the claim of the first respondent for approval of his appointment as a clerk. The appellant apprehends that the D.E.O. may approve the appointment of the first respondent without adverting to the alleged infirmity of his appointment. The respondents 1 and 5 herein seriously dispute the above W.A. No.2029 of 2009 - 2 - submission of the appellant. 2. We notice that such a point was raised by the appellant in his counter affidavit filed in the writ petition, but, the same was not dealt with by the learned Single Judge. We think, it is a matter which has to be dealt with, at the first instance by the D.E.O. and not by this Court. Accordingly, when the D.E.O. takes up the case of approval of appointment of the first respondent, the aforementioned point raised by the appellant shall also be looked into. If the fourth respondent, D.E.O., is hearing the parties, the appellant shall also be given an opportunity of being heard, before a decision is taken. With the above directions, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. Sd/- K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. Sd/- P. Bhavadasan, Judge. DK. (True copy)