IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2008 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15297 of 2008(U) PETITIONER: ------------ THE MANAGER, AUP SCHOOL, PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALIDHARAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PERAMBRA. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. SINDHU B.S., ASSISTANT TEACHER, AUP SCHOOL, PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MUHAMMED. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 15297 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd May, 2008 JUDGMENT The third respondent in the Writ Petition was appointed by the petitioner as UPSA with effect from 5.6.2006. The proposal for approval of the appointment of the third respondent was rejected by the Assistant Educational Officer as per Ext.P2 order dated 10.12.2007. The petitioner, who is the Manager of the School, challenged Ext.P2 order in Ext.P3 appeal before the District Educational Officer. The District Educational Officer, as per Ext.P4 letter dated 7.1.2008, directed the Assistant Educational Officer to forward his remarks urgently. It is stated that the Assistant Educational Officer has not complied with the direction in Ext.P4. 2. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following: “a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction, quashing Ext.P2 order of the 1st respondent dated 10.12.2007; b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to approve the appointment of the 3rd respondent as per Ext.P1 appointment order forthwith and disburse the consequential benefits or in the alternative; c) direct the 1st respondent to send the remarks by the 1st respondent as requested by the 2nd respondent within a time W.P.(C) NO.15297 OF 2008 :: 2 :: frame and further direct the 2nd respondent to dispose of the Ext.P3 appeal after hearing the petitioner and the 3rd respondent; and d) issue such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant.” 3. Since Ext.P2 order is challenged in appeal, reliefs (a) and (b) cannot be granted. So far as relief (c) is concerned, there cannot be any doubt that the Assistant Educational Officer should comply with the direction in Ext.P4. Learned Government Pleader submits that relief (c) can be granted. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent, Assistant Educational Officer, to forward his remarks to the District Educational Officer as per the direction in Ext.P4, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The second respondent, District Educational Officer, shall dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, after hearing all the affected parties. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/