IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2007 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1929 WA.No. 1355 of 2007() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.5372/2007 Dated 27/03/2007 .................... APPELLANT: (PETITIONER): ------------------------------------- MANAGER, U.P. SCHOOL, PULIMATH, KILIMANNOOR, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF RESPONDENTS: (RESPONDENTS): --------------------------------------------- 1. M. SHAJILA BEEVI, S.R. MANZIL, KANNANCODE, NILAMEL P.O., KOLLAM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KILIMANNOOR. 4. PADMAKUMAR, WATCHER-CUM-PEON, U.P.SCHOOL, PULIMATH (SUMAN NIVAS, PULIMATH). 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & ANTONY DOMINIC, JJ. =============================== W.A. NO.1355 OF 2007 ====================== Dated this the 12th day of June, 2007 J U D G M E N T Radhakrishnan, J. First respondent is a claimant under Rule 51(B) of Chapter XIVA KER. The learned counsel for the petitioner raised a contention before the learned Single Judge that no reliance could be placed on Ext.R1(e) certificate issued by the Village Officer on the income of the first respondent. Regarding the income of the first respondent, if the petitioner had any objection, the same should have taken up the matter with the higher authorities which he has not done. Under such circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the findings of the learned Single Judge. Writ appeal is dismissed as above. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. Rp WA : 2 :