IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2010 / 23RD ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16015 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAFEEK KOROTH, LAB ASSISTANT MIM HIGH SCHOOL, PERODE, NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTI NAGAR, TRIVANDRUM. 3. REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, KOZHIKODE. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, VATAKARA. 5. THE MANAGER, MIM HIGH SCHOOL, PERODE, NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY FOR R-5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SANDESH RAJA-R1 TO R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.16015/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: A true copy of the appointment order and approval from 14.8.97. P2: A true copy of the G.O(Rt) No.377/2004/G.Edn. Dated 21.1.2004. P3: A true copy of the relevant pages of the passport. P4: A true copy of the order NO.AcdB1/5872/HSC/2003 dated 21.3.2004. P5: A true copy of the certificate issued by the Prinicipal dated 19.5.2010. P6: A true copy of the communication dt.25.8.2008 of the 3rd respondent to the Principal. P7: A true copy of the request of the Principal to the 4th respondent. P8: A true copy of the communication from 4th respondent dated 21.2.2009. P9: A true copy of the request dated 17.3.2009. P10: A true copy of the communication No.Acd.Spc.5/283/HSE dated 31.3.2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.16015 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as Lab Assistant in MIM High School, Perode in Kozhikode District. He applied for Leave Without Allowances for five years for taking up employment abroad on 31.12.2003. The same was granted as per Ext.P2. Admittedly, the petitioner has entered on leave even before sanctioning of the same on 1.1.2004. Based on the same, now disciplinary proceedings are proposed to be initiated against him and in fact, the Government have issued a direction to initiate disciplinary proceedings for the said lapse. According to the petitioner, as per Ext.P2 leave was sanctioned with effect from 1.1.2004 and therefore, disciplinary proceedings should not have been initiated against him. Pointing out the said aspects and requesting for regularization of the period of absence from 1.1.2004 to 21.1.2004, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P9 on 17.3.2009 before the first respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that it was without considering the same and passing orders thereon, the respondents have decided to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him. W.P.(C) NO.16015/2010 2 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the first respondent. The fact that a direction has been given to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner has been admitted thereunder. But at the same time, it is evident from the said statement that no orders have so far been passed on Ext.P9. There cannot be any doubt that the first respondent is competent to look into the claims and contentions raised in Ext.P9. In fact, the first respondent is legally bound to consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon. In the said circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P9 submitted by the petitioner expeditiously at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Initiation of disciplinary proceedings shall be kept in abeyance till an order is passed on Ext.P9. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.16015/2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C). NO. /2010 JUDGMENT June, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.16015/2010 4