Dismissed

Vasumathi v. a.Krishnaveni & Others

Kerala HC3 Jan 2008WA/3020/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellant challenged a consent order under W.P.(C).15852/07 entered on 31.5.2007, claiming it affected her rights. The Bench held that aggrieved parties should approach the Single Judge directly and dismissed the Writ Appeal, reserving liberty to seek further relief.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the appellant to file an appropriate petition with the Learned Single Judge for appropriate reliefs.

Vasumathi Vs a.Krishnaveni & Others — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2008 / 13TH POUSHA 1929

¶4

WA.No. 3020 of 2007

¶5

--------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.15852/2007 Dated 31/05/2007 ....................

¶6

APPELLANT/3RD PARTY

¶7

-----------------------------------

¶8

VASUMATHI, CHEMBAKASSERY HOUSE, BOOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVUR, KOLLAM-691302.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF

¶10

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS

¶11

¶12

A.KRISHNAVENI, CHEMBAKASSERY HOUSE,

¶13

BOOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVUR, KOLLAM-691302.

¶14

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM.

¶18

A.LALITHA DAS, CHEMBAKASSERY HOUSE, BOOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶19

W.A.NO. 3020/07

¶20

A.VENUGOPAL, CHEMBAKASSERY HOUSE, BOOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶21

A.UDAYAKUMARI, CLERK, CHEMBAKASSERY HIGH SCHOOL, BOOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶22

R1 BY ADV. SRI. ELVIN PETER P.J

¶23

R2 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.P. SREEKRISHNAN.

¶24

R6 BY ADV. SRI. P. GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR.

¶25

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

H.L. DATTU, CJ. & K. M. JOSEPH, J.

¶27

-------------------------------------------------W. A. NO. 3020 OF 2007

¶28

Dated this the 3rd January, 2008

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

H. L. DATTU, C.J:

¶31

A consent order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C). No.15852/07 dated 31.5.2007 is called in question by yet another party, who is of the view that the consent order so passed will affect her rights and interest.

¶32

In our view, if the appellant is of the opinion that the consent order so passed by the learned Single Judge would affect her interest, she can file an appropriate petition/application before the very same learned Single Judge for appropriate reliefs. In that view of the matter, we do not see any reason to entertain this Writ Appeal. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. However, liberty is reserved to the appellant to make an appropriate petition before the learned Single Judge for appropriate reliefs.

¶33

Ordered accordingly.

¶34

H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶35

K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE

¶36

kbk/DK.

Vasumathi v. a.Krishnaveni & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vasumathi v. a.Krishnaveni & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ytate of Kerala Vs a.Younus Kunju

Baby Sindhu Vs State of Kerala

Baby Sindhu Vs State of Kerala

Pincy Paul Vs Inasu Jacob

S.C.& S.T. Action Committee,Kottakkal Vs State of Kerala

John Vs State of Kerala