IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 16TH AUGUST 2011 / 25TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21296 of 2011(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.R.UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 35, S/O.RUDRAN NAMBOODIRI, KIDANGAZHIATH MANA, WEST CHALAKUDY, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, NOW WORKING AS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER, GOVERNMENT MODEL BOYS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, IRINJALAKUDA. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, KERALA, PUNNAN ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695039. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, G H S S, VETTILAPARA, THRISSUR, PIN-680721. 3. K.V.KHADEEJA, RETD. HEADMINSTRESS RAYAMMARAKAR HOUSE, PALAYOOR, THRISSUR-680121. ADV. SRI.M.AJAY, SC, STATE INFORMATION COMMN FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 21296 of 2011(J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD.19.2.2009 EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE PETITIONER DTD.18.3.2009 EXT.P3: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.15.4.2009 WITH THE LETTER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT.7.7.2010 EXT.P5: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.30.9.2010 EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD.18.7.2010 EXT.P7: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.19.6.2009 EXT.P9: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.4.6.2011 EXT.P10: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.15.7.2011 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.21296 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T The prayer in this writ petition is to quash Ext.P8 order of the 1st respondent and Ext.P9 consequential letter issued by the 2nd respondent. The ground on which Ext.P8 challenged is that the said order was passed without hearing the petitioner. A reading of Ext.P8 itself shows that though the order makes reference to the petitioner, he was not issued notice nor was he heard in the matter. The fact that the petitioner was not heard was admitted by the standing counsel appearing for the 1st respondent also. 2. In that view of the matter, he has to be held that Ext.P8 order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and for that reason the order cannot be sustained. 3. Therefore, I quash Ext.P8 and direct that on production of a copy of this judgment, the 1st respondent will issue notice to the petitioner and party respondents and W.P(C) No.21296 of 2011 2 pass fresh orders in the matter after hearing them. 4. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within four weeks thereafter. The Writ Petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ab