IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28445 of 2011(E) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- TINTO THOMAS, AGED 16, S/O.THOMAS, PUTHANVEETTIL (ALAPPATT HOUSE) KOOVAPILLY P.O., KUDAYATHOOR (VIA), IDUKKI REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN (THOMAS FATHER OF THE PETITIONER). BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.THOMAS CHAZHUKKARAN SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SRI.P.K.RAKESH KUMAR SRI.M.A.RUXANA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM-682 030. 2. PRINCIPAL, SACRED HEART HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, THEVARA-682 019. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.28445/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS P1: PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER DATED 17/8/2011 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P2: PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 10/8/11 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3: PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEARING NO.LB4/12332/HSE/11/LD IS DATED 15/9/11. P4: PHOTOCOPY OF THE DISMISSAL ORDER DATED NIL BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5: PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 24/9/11. P6: PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.D-2384/11 DATED 7/10/11 OF THE TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER. P7: PHOTOCOPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER BEARING NO.B4/12579/HSE/2011 DATED 10/10/11 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P8:- COPY OF THE SSLC MARK LIST OF THE PETITIONER MARCH 2011 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS R2(a):- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 25.7.2011 SUBMITTED BY AYSHA K.B. TO THE CLASS TEACHER. R2(b):- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 25.7.2011 SUBMITTED BY AYSHA K.B. TO THE CLASS TEACHER. R2(b):- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 27.7.2011 SUBMITTED BY AYSHA K.B. TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. R2(c):- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 3.8.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. R2(d):- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO THE CLASS TEACHER . R2(e):- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO THE CLASS TEACHER. R2(f):- COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE ENQUIRY COMMITTEE DT.D 10.8.2011. R2(g):- COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER DT. 10.8.2011 . R2(h):- COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER DT. 10.8.2011. W.P.(C) NO.28445/2011 R2(h):- COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE CLASS PTA MEETING HELD ON 11.8.2011. R2(i) i-iii) :- COPY OF THE LETTERS OF THE STUDENTS OF PLUS I COMPUTER SCIENCE CLASS. R2(j):- COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT OF THE ENQUIRY COMMITTEE. R2(k):- COPY OF THE LETTER OF DISMISSAL SENT TO THE FATHER OF THE PETITIONER R2(l):- COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. R2(m):- COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.28445/2011-E ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 10th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, a minor represented by the Guardian, is aggrieved by the proceedings Exts.P1 to P7 and he is also seeking for a direction to continue the study at Class XI in Science Compute stream. Further, a direction is sought to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent-Principal. 3. Ext.P5 shows that the appeal has been filed by the petitioner himself before the Regional Deputy Director of Education which is said to be still pending, as confirmed by the learned Government Pleader. Ext.P7 shows that the said authority has earlier confirmed the suspension of the student. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the first respondent may be directed to take a decision on Ext.P5 appeal after independently assessing various aspects and uninfluenced by the observations in Ext.P7. W.P.(C). No.28445/2011 -:2:- 5. In that view of the matter, there will be a direction to the first respondent to take a decision on Ext.P5 appeal after notice to the petitioner and the second respondent and any other parties which he prefers to be heard within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment, untrammelled by the observations in Ext.P7. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms