IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2008 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1930 WA.No. 825 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.9587/2008 Dated 24/03/2008 .................... APPELLANT: ----------- R.RENUKA BHAI, W/O. S. VELAYUDHAN K AGED 54 YEARS, PA TO DEO, KOLLAM RESIDING AT KSHEMA, VALIYAVILA, EDAMON P.O. PUNALUR BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO GOVENRMENT GENERAL EDUCATION (N) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY G.P.SRI.BENNY GERVASIS THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------------- W.A.NO.825 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of April, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J: The appellant was the 2nd petitioner in the writ petition. The appellant along with three others challenged Ext.P1 order of the Government dated 17.3.2008 placing them under suspension. They were suspended in connection with the alleged irregularities in the preparation of the survey and visit report in respect of the Y.M.M Central School, Chittumoola, filed for the purpose of grant of N.O.C by the Government for affiliation with C.B.S.E. The report did not state the correct facts regarding existence of other C.B.S.E schools in the area, apart from High Schools which follow the Kerala syllabus. The Government felt that the then D.E.O and his team of officers were responsible for the alleged irregularity. So, in contemplation of the disciplinary proceedings, all of them were placed under suspension. The appellant submits that she is totally innocent and having regard to the assignment of duties in her office, she has no role to play in the submission of the report. W.A.NO.825/2008 . 2 2. The learned Single Judge took the view that these are all matters which are to be placed before the Government which is empowered to review the suspension order under Rule 10(6) of the KCS & CCA Rules. W.A.No.788/2008 filed by the 1st petitioner against the said judgment has been dismissed by us. The learned Single Judge has only relegated the petitioners to invoke the alternative remedy available to them. The learned Single Judge has taken special care to ensure that the 2nd petitioner's case is considered before she retires from service on 30.4.2008. The said second petitioner is the appellant herein. 3. The Government have power to review its own order under Rule 35 of the above said Rules also, apart from the power under Section 10(6) noticed above. When the learned Single Judge has exercised its discretion by relegating the appellant to invoke the statutory remedy available to her, the appellate court is not justified in interfering with the same. We cannot hold that the exercise of discretion by the learned Single Judge is perverse. In view of the several decisions of this Court under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, this Court is not justified in interfering in appeal with the discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge in W.A.NO.825/2008 . 3 this regard. If the representation of the appellant, Annexure-III, is considered by the Government before 20.4.2008, her grievance is likely to be redressed. In view of the direction of the learned Single Judge, the Government is bound to do that. Therefore, we think no ground has been made out warranting interference with the judgment under appeal. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. cl W.A.NO.825/2008 . 4