IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2010 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36349 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BIJU THOKMAS, S/O. J.THOMAS, AGED 39 YEARS, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT(MATHS) MULAMANA HIGH SCHOOL, P.O.ANAKUDY, VAMANAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 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,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ATTINGAL,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695101. 5. THE MANAGER, MULAMANA HIGH SCHOOL, P.O. ANAKUDY-605606, VAMANAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.36349 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The case of the petitioner is the following : The petitioner was appointed as High School Assistant (Maths) in Mulamana High School, Anakudy, Vamanapuram from 1.6.2009 onwards in a resignation vacancy. The District Educational Officer rejected the proposal for approval as per Exhibit P1 order dated 7.10.2009 on the ground that the proposal was belatedly submitted and also on other grounds. Against Exhibit P1 order, the Manager filed appeal before the Deputy Director of Education, who, as per Exhibit P2 order dated 11.5.2010 condoned the delay in submitting the proposal for approval. The Manager resubmitted the proposal to the District Educational Officer. The District Educational Officer as per Exhibit P3 order dated 8.6.2010 directed the Manager to file appeal before the Director of Public Instruction. This view was taken on the ground that the Deputy Director in his WPC No.36349/2010 2 order dated 11.5.2010 had only condoned the delay. In the light of Exhibit P3 order, the petitioner filed revision before the Director of Public Instruction. The Director of Public Instruction dismissed the revision as per Exhibit P4 order dated 18.9.2010. Challenging Exhibit P4 order, the petitioner submitted Exhibit P5 revision dated 4.10.2010 before the Government. It is stated that Exhibit P5 revision was registered in the General Education Department as File No.61114/A3/2010 and that it is pending. 2. Though several reliefs are claimed in the Writ Petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the time being, it would be sufficient, if a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of Exhibit P5 by the first respondent. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition WPC No.36349/2010 3 is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and dispose of Exhibit P5 revision, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the fifth respondent, the Manager. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. The petitioner shall also send a copy of the Writ Petition and a copy of the judgment to the fifth respondent Manager by registered post and he shall produce proof of the same before the first respondent. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl