IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 25TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 15028 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- R.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI,MANAGER, R.V.V.H.S.S,VALAKAM,KOTTARAKKARA,KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTAHPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTAHPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTTARAKKARA. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.T.B.REMANI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 15028 of 2009 A P P E N D I X PETITIONERS' EXTS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER DT.24/08/2007. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.SC(2)/32375/08/DPI, DT.30/05/2008. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.NO.SC(2)/32375/08/DPI/D.DIS, DT.10/09/2008. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER B2/3477/08/D.DIS DT.16/09/2008 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION FILED BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DT.29/09/2008 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.60754/A3/08/G.EDN.DT.08/01/2009/01/04/2009. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B2/3477/08 DT.04/05/2009. \\TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.15028/2009-W ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 16th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T Mainly aggrieved by Exts.P3 and P6 orders, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition. 2. The petitioner is the Manager of a High School and Vocational Higher Secondary School. Ext.P3 is the order passed by the Director of Public Instruction in relation to the staff fixation for the year 2007-08. It was based on the visits made by the Super Check Cell. Aggrieved by the same, the Manager filed revision petition before the Government as per Ext.P5. Detailed grounds have been stated in Ext.P5 to assail the conclusions arrived at in Ext.P3. A reading of Ext.P6 shows that it is in the form of a letter addressed to the Manager rather than an order disposing of the revision petition in exercise of the statutory power conferred on the Government after hearing the revision petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was not heard before Ext.P6 was issued and communicated to the petitioner. W.P.(C). No.15028/2009 -:2:- 4. Since revision petition was disposed of without hearing the writ petitioner, on that ground itself Ext.P6 will have to be set aside. Apart from that the said proceeding is evidently issued not in exercise of the statutory powers of revision and as observed earlier, it is only in the form of a letter. Therefore, on both these grounds, Ext.P6 cannot be sustained and the same is quashed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the staff fixation order for the subsequent years will show that the proceedings Ext.P3 cannot be sustained. If the petitioner places those details before the Government while hearing Ext.P5 revision petition afresh, the same will also be considered by the Government. Therefore, there will be a direction to the first respondent to take a decision on Ext.P5 on its merits after hearing the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The interim order passed by this Court dated 02/06/2009 will continue to be in force till orders are passed afresh. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms