IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2009 / 2ND POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 37234 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KULSUMBI.M,AGED 53 YEARS, W/O.ABDUL KHADER JAILANY,MARIAM MANZIL,CIVIL STATION WARD,ALAPPUZHA-12. BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, OFFICE OF THE DPI,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE MANAGER,LAJNATHUL MUHAMMEEDIYA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,ALAPPUZHA. 4. THE DIRECTOR,VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU,ALAPPUZHA UNIT. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI MUHAMOOD T.T THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.37234/2009-Y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is working as Headmistress of the Lajnathul Muhammedeeya Higher Secondary School, Alappuzha managed by the third respondent. The apprehension of the petitioner is that the Manager may inflict punishment proposed as per Ext.13 without considering the reply given by the petitioner. The petitioner has filed Ext.P14 styled as revision petition under Rule 92 of the Kerala Education Rules before the Government in the matter. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader. It is submitted that under Rule 74 of Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules, previous sanction of the Director is required for imposing the punishment of removal from service by the Manager and, therefore, there may be a direction to the Director of Higher Secondary Education or any authorised officer to hear the petitioner before the sanction, if any, as per Rule 74 of Chapter XIV-A K.E.R, is granted to the Manager. 3. Therefore, I am not going into the merits of the claim or the merits of the disciplinary action at this stage. The second respondent or any officer authorised by him, who is empowered to grant sanction under Rule 74 of Chapter W.P.(C). No.37234/2009 -:2:- XIV-A K.E.R., will take a decision with regard to the issuance of such sanction, if any, only after hearing the petitioner. The legal contentions raised by the petitioner are left open. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms