Dismissed

Y.Thankamma Menon v. the D.E.O.

Kerala HC1 Apr 2008WP(C)/5395/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought approval as manager of a school, denied due to bank loan liability. Bank argued property threat. Court declined merits review as expansionistship was exhausted and directed petitioner to file revision in Government. Writ petition disposed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed by direction to file appeal/revision against the rejection order before the Government.

Y.Thankamma Menon Vs the D.E.O. — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2008 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 5395 of 2008(P)

¶6

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

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

---------------Y.THANKAMMA MENON,W/O.LATE P.S.MENON PANDARATHIL HOUSE, PADINJARATHARA,NALLEPILLY P.O. CHITTUR TALUK,PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.RAVINDRAN (SR.) SRI.ANIL SIVARAMAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

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

¶12

1. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER PALAKKAD.

¶13

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRCTIONS THIRVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.T. MAHAMOOD

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 5395 of 2008

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

EXT.P1:	COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE R1 DT. 8.12.05.
EXT.P1(a):	COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE OF SRI. BALAKRISHNA MENON ISSUED ON 26.11.05.
EXT.P2:	COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD 15.12.05.
EXT.P2(a):	COPY OF APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF MANAGEMENT.
EXT.P3:	COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF R1 TO THE PETITIONER DTD 23.12.2005.
EXT.P4:	COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE R1 DTD 26.5.06.
EXT.P5:	COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE DTD 4.5.06.
EXT.P6:	COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF R1 TO THE R3 DTD 5.6.06.
EXT.P7:	COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF R1 TO THE PETITIONER DTD 3.10.06.
EXT.P8:	COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO R1 DTD 9.11.06.
EXT.P9:	COPY OF COMMUNICATION OF R1 TO R3 DTD 3.1.07.
EXT.P10:	COPY OF COMMUNICATION OF R3 TO R1 DTD 26.2.07.
EXT.P11:	COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY R3 TO R1 DTD 13.4.07.
EXT.P12:	COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY R1 BEFORE R3 DTD. 13.4.07.
EXT.P13:	COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF R1 TO R3 DTD 14.8.07.
EXT.P14:	COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)NO.37195/07 DTD 17.12.07.
EXT.P15:	COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2 DATED 8.1.2008.
EXT.P16:	COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM R2 TO THE PETITIONER DTD 28.1.08.
EXT.P17:	COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY R2 DTD 27.2.08.

¶19

TRUE COPY

¶20

PA TO JUDGE.

¶21

S. SIRI JAGAN, J.

¶22

W.P.(C)No.5395 OF 2008

¶23

Dated this the 1^st day of April, 2008

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

The petitioner is aggrieved by refusal of the educational authority to approve her as the manager of Sree Krishna High School, Nallepilly on the ground that the petitioner has certain liabilities to a Co-operative Bank, without discharging which the petitioner's managership cannot be approved. The contention of the petitioner is that discharge of a loan liability to a Co-operative Bank cannot be a condition for approval of the managership of a School.

¶26

The learned Government pleader submits that it is not because merely a loan liability is pending but because on account of that loan liability, the School properties are under threat that the managership has not been approved. I am not inclined to go into the merits of the case, because the Director of Public Instruction has passed Ext.P17 order rejecting the petitioner's application, against which the petitioner has a right of

¶27

W.P.(c)No.5395/08

¶28

¶29

appeal/revision before the Government. Therefore, if the petitioner files an appeal/revision, against Ext.P17 order, the same would be disposed of by the Government as expeditiously as possible.

¶30

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶31

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

¶32

Acd

¶33

W.P.(c)No.5395/08 3

Y.Thankamma Menon v. the D.E.O.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Y.Thankamma Menon v. the D.E.O.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd.,Cherthala Vs R.Mohan

K.C.Sony Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.& Ors.

K.P.Sivanandan Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

M/S.Prasanthi Cashew Ompany Vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation

E.K.Narayanan Vs the Recovery Officer,Debt Recovery

Jose.P.P. Vs Senior General Manager and Others