IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2010 / 26TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 25819 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MANAGER,ST.JOHN'S SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,VADAKARA,OLLYPURAM PO, KOOTHATTUKULAM,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN 686 679. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SMT.R.RANJINI SRI.T.R.SADEESAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,GOVT.SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM 695 001. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,CIVIL STATION,KAKKANAD,ERNAKULAM 682 030. 3. SMT.BINDUMOL P.ABRAHAM,HEADMISTRESS (UNDER SUSPENSION),ST.JOHN'S SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VADAKARA,OLLYPURAM PO, KOOTHATTUKULAM,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,RESIDING AT KOZHIKKATTIL HOUSE,KARIMPANA PO,KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN 686 662. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI. DILIP MOHAN, R1, R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 25819 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is the Manager of St.John's Syrian Higher Secondary School, Vadakara. Alleging certain misconducts the 3rd respondent was placed under suspension by the petitioner as per Ext.P1 order dated 29.7.2010. In terms of the provisions under the Kerala Education Rules, the factum of suspension of the 3rd respondent was duly reported to the competent educational authorities. Later, a request was made to the second respondent to grant sanction to place the 3rd respondent under suspension beyond 15 days. For deciding the said matter, the 3rd respondent was heard. However, the second respondent after hearing the 3rd respondent entered into a finding that out of the 12 charges only 4 charges were proved and others are not proved. After arriving at such conclusion it was held that no ground exists to continue with his suspension, in the circumstances; beyond 15 days and pursuant to that decision vide Ext.P4 order directed the petitioner to reinstate the 3rd respondent. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the second respondent the matter was taken up in revision. Ext.P5 is the revision petition filed under Rule 92 of chapter XIV A of KER. WPC.25819 of 2010 : 2 : Along with Ext.P5 revision petition the petitioner has moved Ext.P6 stay petition. The apprehension of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities may initiate coercive steps pending Exts.P5 and P6. It is in the said circumstances that this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. Evidently, the petitioner has moved the first respondent through Ext.P5 revision. It being a statutory revision the first respondent is bound to consider and pass orders thereon. Therefore, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 revision petition expeditiously at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment with notice to the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. As already noticed hereinbefore, along with Ext.P5 the petitioner has moved Ext.P6 stay petition as well. The first respondent is, therefore, directed to take up Ext.P6 first and to pass orders thereon within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such time operation and implementation of Ext.P4 order shall be kept in abeyance. This Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge