IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2010 / 30TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13174 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BALAKRISHNAN KUTTIKATTIL, S/O. KANNAN, AGED 51 YEARS, (HSST), RAMAKRISHNA MISSION HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOZHIKODE - 18. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KEARLA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, KOZHIKODE. 4. THE MANAGER, RAMAKRISHNA MISSION HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOZHIKODE - 18. 5. SMT.V.M.PADMAKUMARI, RAMAKRISHNA MISSION HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOZHIKODE - 18. BY G.P.SRI.SANDESH RAJA FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.13174 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 21st July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was promoted as Principal of the 4th respondent's school as per Ext.P3. As per Ext.P5, the third respondent declined to approve the said appointment. Aggrieved by Ext.P5 order Ext.P6 appeal was filed before the second respondent. The second respondent as per Ext.P8 order rejected the appeal and virtually confirmed Ext.P5 order. Against the said order the petitioner has now approached the first respondent by filing Ext.P10 revision petition. Ext.P10 revision petition is dated 19.3.2010. During the pendency of Ext.P10 revision petition, the third respondent has issued Ext.P11 order dated 23.4.2010. Pending this writ petition and Ext.P10 revision petition the Manager complied with the earlier orders and taking note of the order of appointment issued in favour of the fifth respondent, the third respondent granted approval to the appointment of the 5th respondent as Principal vide Ext.P11. The grievance of the petitioner is that since Ext.P10 is a statutory revision petition under Rule 92 of Chapter XIV- A of the Kerala Education Rules, the first respondent is bound to pass orders thereon. The further contention is that since Ext.P10 statutory revision petition is pending before the Government, the third WP(C).No.13174/2010 2 respondent should not have passed Ext.P11 order. I do not think it necessary to consider those aspects at this stage in view of the pendency of the revision petition before the Government. In the aforesaid circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P10 revision petition dated 19.3.2010 expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, with notice to the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5. It is made clear that the approval granted to the 5th respondent as per Ext.P11 will be subject to the result of the decision on Ext.P10 revision petition. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS