IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 23834 of 2010(D) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- C.P.PARAMESWARAN, MANAGER, C.P.N.U.P.SCHOOL, VATTAMKULAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.S.KARTHIKA SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.M.R.ANISON SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI SRI.P.N.APPUKUTTAN SMT.P.A.RINUSA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE ASST. EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, EDAPPAL. 3. K.N.SREEDAN, S/O. LATE K.K.NARAYANAN, KOVAPARA KANAYOOR MANA, MUNDOOR P.O., VATTAMKULAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 679 578. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA R3 BY ADVS. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR, SMT.UMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.23834/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 15.9.2008 ISSUED BY THE HEADMISTRESS OF SVJBS, KUTTIPALA. P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 3.6.2008. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 5.8.200 IN WPC. 37740/2008. P4:- COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE DTD. 12.10.2009. P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 2.11.2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P6:- COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DTD. 18.12.2009 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P7:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 15.12.2010 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE tss T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.23834/2010-D ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 24th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by the Manager of a school seeking to quash Ext.P5 order whereby the Deputy Director of Education allowed the claim of the third respondent for appointment under Rule 51B of Chapter XIV A Kerala Education Rules. 2. It appears that the petitioner had filed a revision petition before the Government as per Ext.P6 along with a stay petition. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Government by Ext.P7 order rejected the stay petition as well as the revision petition without considering anything on the merits of the matter. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent. The writ petition itself is taken up for hearing by consent of parties. A reading of Ext.P7 order shows that the Government found that the petitioner is liable W.P.(C). No.23834/2010 -:2:- to grant appointment under Rule 51B of Chapter XIV A K.E.R to the third respondent. None of the contentions of the respective parties have been considered or discussed. Apart from that the revision petition has been disposed of along with stay petition without hearing the parties also. Therefore, it is only proper that the Government is directed to re-hear the revision petition Ext.P6 within a time frame. 4. In that view of the matter, Ext.P7 order is quashed. There will be a direction to the Government to take a fresh decision on Ext.P6 after hearing the petitioner and the third respondent within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms