IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32278 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHIBU GEORGE,HEADMASTER,ASRAM.H.S.S, PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 030. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN 686691. 3. THE MANAGER,THE MAR THOMA & E.A.SCHOOLS CORPORATE MANAGEMENT,SCS CAMPUS,THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 101. 4. SMT.K.MARYKUTTY,HEADMISTRESS, M.T.H.S,VALAKOM,KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN 691 506. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.32278 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner in the Writ Petition are the following : “(i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order calling for the records leading to Exhibits P5 and P6 and quashing the same, to the extent it rejects the promotion of the petitioner as Headmaster and approves the promotion of the fourth respondent as Headmistress. (ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents 1 and 2 to approve the promotion of the petitioner as Headmaster in preference to the fourth respondent. (iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibits P7 appeal forthwith. (iv) and grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case including costs.” WPC No.32278/2010 2 2. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the first respondent heard the parties in Exhibit P7 appeal and orders were reserved. It is stated that Exhibit P7 appeal was filed against Exhibits P5 and P6 orders. Therefore, when Exhibit P7 appeal is pending, it is not necessary and proper to entertain the attack on Exhibits P5 and P6. The learned Government Pleader having stated that Exhibit P7 appeal was heard and orders were reserved, it is sufficient, if the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to dispose of Exhibit P7 appeal within a period of one month. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the first respondent to dispose of Exhibit P7 appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl