IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2008 / 31ST ASHADHA 1930 RP.No. 791 of 2008(J) --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.13117/2008 Dated 11/04/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/3RD PARTY ST.JOHN'S JACOBITE SYRIAN CHURCH, VADAKARA, REP. BY ITS TRUSTEES K.I. KURIAKOSE AND SUNNY JOHN. BY ADV. SRI.SHAHUL HAMEED MOOPPAN RESPONDENTS: 1. JOYCE MARY N.G. AGED 28 YEARS, W/O. BHASANTH MATHEW, U.P.S.A. ST.JOHNS, SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VADAKARA, RESIDING AT LION GUARD HOUSE, KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM (DIST.) 2. LIGI JOHN, AGED 24 YEARS. D/O. T.K.YOHANNAN, H.S.A. (ENGLISH) ST.JOHNS SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VADAKARA, RESIDING AT ALAPPATTU HOUSE, PIRLAMADOM, ERNAKULAM. 3. BEENA ABRAHAM, AGED 26 YEARS, W/O. BIJU C.A. U.P.S.A. ST.JOHNS, SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VADAKARA, THADATHIL, AIRAPURAM P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, (PRESENTLY RESIDING AT CHAMAKKALAYIL HOUSE, OORAMANA.P.O. ERNAKULAM. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M.R.SABU ADV. SRI. C. UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== R.P. No. 791 of 2008 in W.P(C)No.13117 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2008. O R D E R The petitioner who claims to be the owner of the school in which respondents 1 to 3 are teachers, seeks review of my judgment dated 11.4.2008, which reads thus: “First petitioner was appointed as UPSA in the St.Johns Syrian Higher Secondary School, Vadakara on 9-11-2007. The 2nd petitioner was appointed as UPSA in the same school on 6-12-2007. The 3rd the petitioner was appointed as UPSA in that school on 11-1-2008. The petitioners' complaint is that although appointment orders were forwarded to the respondent by the manager on 17.11.2007, 11-12-2007 and 22-1-2008 respectively, so far no orders have been passed by the respondent on the question of approval of the same. The petitioners seek a direction to the respondent to pass appropriate orders approving the appointment of the petitioners. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondent to consider and pass orders on the question of approval of the appointment of the petitioners within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners shall forward a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition to the respondent for compliance.” 2. The petitioner's contention is that the respondents 1 R.P. No. 791 of 2008 in W.P(C)No.13117 of 2008 - 2 - to 3 obtained the judgment suppressing material facts in so far as the question as to who is entitled to be the manager of the school is in dispute pending in W.A. No. 2515 of 2007 before this court. I am of opinion that in so far as I have not decided the eligibility for approval in my judgment, the question of pendency of the Writ Appeal does not in any way affect my judgment. All what I have directed in my judgment was only to pass orders on the question of approval of the appointment of respondents 1 to 3. That being so, I do not think that there is any scope for review of my judgment. Accordingly, this review petition is dismissed. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs