IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 24TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 15666 of 2008(M) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------- 1. REV.FR.MATHEW, NJONGINIYIL, MANAGER, HOLY TRINITY SCHOOL, KALKANDYN P.O., ATTAPPADY, MANNARKKAD - 67852. 2. V.V.MATHEW, PRESIDENT OF PARENT TEACHERS ASSOCIATION OF HOLI TRINITY SCHOOL, THRITHWAMALA, KALKANDY P.O., ATTAPPADY. BY ADV. SRI.V.C.JAMES SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD. BY ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR R1 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 15666 OF 2008 M ==================== Dated this the 15th day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioners submit that following Ext.P7 notification issued by the 3rd respondent, he has submitted Ext.P8, an application for recognition of the Unaided English Medium of which the first petitioner is the Manager. It is their contention that following receipt of Ext.P7, an enquiry was conducted into the claim for recognition and Ext.P8 contains the report also. Referring to Ext.P8, it is contended that recommendation favourable for grant of recognition has been made by the Enquiry Officer. It is stated that the matter is still pending consideration of the 2nd respondent. 2. In this writ petition, what is sought for is a direction to the 2nd respondent to take an expeditious decision on the application made by the petitioner following Ext.P7 and in the light of recommendations made in Ext.P8. If as stated by the petitioner, in response to Ext.P7 notification, he has submitted Ext.P8 application and that the same has been recommended, it is essential that the 2nd respondent shall take a final decision in the matter in the light of the rules that are governing the same, more particularly those contained in Chapter V of the KER. WPC 15666/08 :2 : 3. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the 2nd respondent shall take up Ext.P8, consider and pass orders in the light of the recommendations made by the enquiry officer and pass final orders thereon in accordance with law. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 months of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp