IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 24TH APRIL 2009 / 4TH VAISAKHA 1931 WP(C).No. 12635 of 2009(Y) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ ANOOP CHANDRAN, S/O.CHANDRAN, RESIDING AT RAMAKRISHNA NIVAS, SREEKRISHNAPURAM P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.A.R.NIMOD SRI.C.A.ANOOP RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHERPLACHERRY, PALAKKAD. 3. THE MANAGER, PERUMANGODE A.L.P.SCHOOL, SREEKRISHNAPURAM, PALAKKAD. R1 AND R2 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPIN DAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No. 12635 of 2009 - Y --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T According to the petitioner, though he had preferred Ext.P10 on 31.3.2009 before the second respondent, no action is taken thereon for appointment under the dying in harness scheme. Therefore, he approached this Court by preferring this writ petition praying inter alia to issue a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to consider Ext.P10 and also for appropriate direction to respondents 1 and 2 regarding his claim for appointment under the above scheme. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader. 3. The petitioner's father one K.P.Chandran died in harness on 7.2.2002 while he was working as Assistant Teacher in the Perumangode A.L.P.School. At that time, the petitioner was only at the age of 12 years. According to the petitioner, the other legal heirs of the deceased Chandran had no objection in giving appointment to the petitioner under the dying in harness scheme. It is also his case that he is fully competent for getting such appointment. According to the WP(C) NO.12635 of 2009 :-2-: petitioner, he had filed Ext.P4 application before the Manager of the school, but the Manager maintained a stand that the legal heirs of the deceased Chandran did not raise any claim. The said stand of the Manager is evidenced by Ext.P5. However, I am not inclined to consider the merit or otherwise of the claim of the petitioner as Ext.P10 is pending before the second respondent, who can be directed to dispose of the same within a reasonable period. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to take up Ext.P10 complaint preferred by the petitioner and dispose of the same after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as all concerned within a period of 45 days from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. V.K.Mohanan, Judge MBS/ WP(C) NO.12635 of 2009 :-3-: V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- Crl.A.NO. OF 200 -------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T WP(C) NO.12635 of 2009 :-4-: DATED: -3-2009 WP(C) NO.12635 of 2009 :-5-: