IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH APRIL 2008 / 22ND CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 13112 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ R.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, SENIOR PUBLICATION OFFICER, SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT, KALADY. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT, KALADY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT, KALADY. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI. P.K. VIJAYA MOHAN GOVT. PLEADER SRI. A.J. VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/04/2008, THE COURT, ON THE SAME DAY, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 13112 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 11th April, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an employee of the 1st respondent-University. He apprehends that pursuant to Ext. P8 report of the Finance Department of the Government of Kerala, the petitioner's appointment is likely to be cancelled for certain reasons which are not sustainable as is evident from Ext. P9 judgment in an exactly identical case. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order calling for the records leading to Ext. P8, to the extent it recommends to cancel the appointment of the petitioner as Senior Publication Officer in the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, and quashing the same. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or injunction restraining the respondents from cancelling the appointment of the petitioner as Senior Publication Officer in the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order declaring that the appointment of the petitioner as Senior Publication Officer as per Ext. P5 order is perfectly legal and valid.” 2. I have heard the learned standing counsel for the University also. 3. I am of opinion that the applicability of Ext. P9 judgment in petitioner's case as also the sustainability of the findings in Ext. P8 are all matters to be considered by the 1st respondent-University when it is proposed to take further action against the petitioner pursuant to Ext. P8. I am sure that the respondents would not take further action without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner when the petitioner can produce Ext. P9 judgment and take all contentions available to him against the proposed action. Therefore, making it clear that further action pursuant to Ext. P8 shall only be W.P.C. No. 13112/08 -: 2 :- after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, the writ petition is closed. S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/