IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6187 of 2010(W) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- THE MANAGER, NARIKKUNI A.U.P SCHOOL, NARIKKUNI, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. MR.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THAMARASSERY. 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KODUVALLI. 4. K.K.NAFEESA, HEADMISTRESS (UNDER SUSPENSION), NARIKKUNI AUP SCHOOL, MELEMANTHOTTATHIL HOUSE, MADAVOOR P.O.,KOZHIKODE. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. A.J. VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.6187 OF 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 25th day of February 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the Manager of an aided school. He suspended the Headmistress of the school with effect from 18/12/2009, alleging disobeyance of specific instruction issued by him to the Headmistress not to allow a suspended teacher to sign the attendance register. The petitioner approached the 4th respondent for permission to continue the suspension beyond 15 days, which was also sanctioned as per Ext.P2 order. 2. The 4th respondent filed an appeal before the second respondent. In the meanwhile, the 4th respondent filed a complaint before the Vanitha Commission also, which was forwarded to the school for the enquiry by the anti- harassment committee. The committee by Ext.P7 report found that the complaint was frivolous and false. Therefore, the Headmistress was issued with another show cause W.P.(C). No.6187 OF 2010 -2- notice adding further charge of filing a false complaint against the Manager. However, the second respondent allowed the appeal of the 4th respondent, which according to the petitioner was without considering the facts stated by the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the petitioner filed Ext.P10 revision petition before the Government along with Ext.P10(a) petition, for stay of further proceedings pursuant to the appellate order. The petitioner now confines her relief for a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on both Exts.P10 and P10(a). 3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. In view of the judgment I propose to pass, I do not think it is necessary to issue notice to the 4th respondent at this juncture. Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P10 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy W.P.(C). No.6187 OF 2010 -3- of this Judgment. However, the 1st respondent shall consider Ext.P10(a) petition for stay within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE nl.