IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2011 / 13TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 35939 of 2010(N) ----------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- SMT.SAVITHRI P, MANAGER, CHEEKKILODE AMLP SCHOOL, CHEEKKILODE PO, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP BY SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,TRIVANDRUM 695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS TRIVANDRUM 695 001. 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER BALUSSERY, KOZHIKKODE 673 612. 4. T.BABURAJ, HEADMASTER CHEEKKILODE AMLP SCHOOL, CHEEKKILODE PO, KOZHIKKODE 673 315. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. NISHA BOSE R4 BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE THOMAS (MEVADA), SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.MANU GEORGE KURUVILLA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.35939 Of 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges the order Exhibit P6 passed by the Director of Public Instructions wherein the view taken is that the complaint against the 4th respondent has no substance. 2. The petitioner is the present Manager of the School and the 4th respondent is the Headmaster therein. The husband of the petitioner late Shri V.K.Sukumaran Kidavu was the Manager of the School till his death on 20.2.2009. Vacancy to the post of Headmaster arose on 1.4.2007 consequent on the retirement of the former Headmaster. The 4th respondent being the senior teacher was promoted, according to the petitioner, temporarily under Rule 45C of Chapter XIV-A of KER. Thereafter, the 4th respondent has been granted approval as Headmaster on permanent basis. The same has resulted in the petitioner filing a complaint which was disposed of by the Director of Public Instructions. According to the petitioner, the 4th respondent has forged the signature of the former Manager, late husband of the petitioner. It is contended that the late Manager did not forward any appointment order for approval of the 4th respondent as Headmaster. What was proposed was only temporary appointment W.P.(C)No.35939/10 -2- of the Headmaster. It is complained that while disposing of the matter by the Director of Public Instructions, none of these contentions have been considered. 3. Heard the leaned Senior Counsel for the 4th respondent, who submitted that the allegations have no merit. It is further pointed out that even during the life time of the deceased Manager, no complaints were raised against the 4th respondent. According to the 4th respondent, the present allegations are only an afterthought. 4. The petitioner has already filed a revision petition before the Government as per Exhibit P7. Therefore, I am not going into the merits of the dispute between the parties. It is upto the Government to take a decision on Exhibit P7 and there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P7 after hearing the petitioner and the 4th respondent within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of the Writ Petition along with a copy of this judgment for compliance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn True copy P.A.to Judge