IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2010 / 17TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20037 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.K.JALAJA, W/O.A.J.ROY, AGED 39 YEARS, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (HINDI), HIGH SCHOOL, THIRUVALAYANNUR, KALLUR-VADAKKEKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. THE MANAGER, HIGH SCHOOL, THIRUVALAYANNUR, KALLUR- VADAKKEKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRISANDESH RAJA FOR R1 TO R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.20037/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER. P2 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DEO. P3 COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE MANAGER. P4 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR. P5 COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE THE DIRECTOR BY THE MANAGER. P6 COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER. P7 COPY OF THE GO(P) NO.317/2005/G.EDN. P8 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN 35101/08. P9 COPY OF THE GO(RT)NO.1053/09/G.EDN. P10 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.30657/05. P11 COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO.886/2008/G.EDN P12 COPY OF THE TIME TABLE. P13 COPY OF THE GO(P) NO.10/10/G.EDN. // True Copy // P.A. To Judge C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 20037 of 2009 Y ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 8th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T This Court passed an interim order on 02-06-2010. It was ordered taking note of the action on the part of the fifth respondent in not appearing before this Court even after the receipt of notice in this proceedings from this Court and at the same time, showing reluctance to comply with the directions in Ext.P13. Evidently, the said order was passed taking into account the fact that the fifth respondent did not challenge the conditions incorporated in Ext.P13. As per the interim order dated 02-06- 2010, a direction was issued, in the aforesaid circumstances, to the fifth respondent to comply with the directions issued by the first respondent in G.O.(P) No.10/10/G.Edn. dated 12-01-2010 (Ext.P13) within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. It is pertinent to note in this context that the appointment of the petitioner has not been approved solely on account of the non-compliance with the directions in Ext.P13 by the fifth respondent. In paragraph 2 of the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.9143/2010, the petitioner has specifically stated that the WPC.20037/2009 : 2 : order passed by this Court on 02-06-2010 was sent to the fifth respondent by speed post on 11-06-2010. The time limit of two weeks specified in the interim order in such circumstances has expired long back. In the circumstances, it can only be inferred that the fifth respondent has absolutely no objection in obeying the conditions incorporated in Ext.P13. At any rate, no person can be permitted to defeat dispensation of justice. In fact, the intention with which Ext.P13 has been issued is only to see that while approving the appointment effected from 2006-2007 to 2009-2010, the concerned Manager gives an undertaking to give appointment to an equal number of protected teachers/ non- teaching staff. 2. In the aforesaid circumstances obtained in this case and taking into account in purport with which Ext.P13 has been issued, I am of the view that the fourth respondent, who has already received the order of appointment of the petitioner for considering approval of the same, shall consider the question of its approval as if the fifth respondent has no objection in complying with the conditions in Ext.P13 to the extent it is required WPC.20037/2009 : 3 : to comply with for approving the appointment of the petitioner. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the fourth respondent to consider the question of approval of appointment of the petitioner made as per Ext.P1 order dated 14-06-2007, treating that the fifth respondent has executed a bond in terms of G.O.(P) No.10/10/G.Edn. Dated 12- 01-2010(Ext.P13). This shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) aks