Disposed

M.Sasikumar v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Jun 2010WP(C)/14784/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a clerk and heir of a deceased school manager, sought appointment as Manager. Court found a statutory bar under Kerala Education Rules but noted petitioner already approached the Government with a representation. Petition dismissed without deciding merits; Govt directed to decide within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to first respondent (Government) to consider petitioner's representation and pass orders expeditiously within two months.

M.Sasikumar Vs the State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2010 / 19TH JYAISTHA 1932

¶5

WP(C).No. 14784 of 2010(W)

PETITIONER(S):

M.SASIKUMAR, S/O. K.UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 35 YEARS, KARUMATHIL HOUSE, P.O.PUDURUTHY, THRISSUR DIST.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

¶13

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

¶14

THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14

¶15

THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶16

GOVT.PLEADER SRI.DILIP MOHAN

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶19

W.P.(C). NO. 14784 OF 2010

¶20

Dated this the 9^th day of June, 2010

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The petitioner is working as Clerk in the Sarvodayam Vocational Higher Secondary School, Aryampadam. His father, Sri. K. Uniikrishnan was the owner and approved manager of the said school. He died on 7.10.2007 and, consequently, the ownership devolved on his legal heirs including the petitioner. Sri.Unnikrishnan was survived by his son, the petitioner, daughter and his widow. Petitioner's sister is a teacher in the said school. The mother of the petitioner has nominated him as the Manager of the said school. According to the petitioner, he bequeathed the ownership in terms of a will executed by his father. There is a dispute regarding the will instituted by the petitioner's sister and it is pending before the Additional District Court, Thrissur as L.A.O.P No.229/2008. Ext.P1 is the interim order passed by the Additional District Court, Thrissur. As per Ext.P1, the petitioner has been appointed as the Manager of the said school as an interim arrangement on condition that all vital decisions including the appointment to any post in the school, either temporary or permanent, shall be done only with the concurrence of the

¶23

W.P.(C) NO.14784/2010

¶24

¶25

Court till the suit is disposed of on merits. Subsequent to Ext.P1 order, the petitioner has approached competent educational authorities vide Ext.P2 for approving his appointment as the Manager of the said school. The third respondent forwarded Ext.P2 to the second respondent as per Ext.P3 and the same is pending. On being aggrieved by the delay in the matter of disposal of Ext.P2 application, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

¶26

True that as per Ext.P1, the petitioner was appointed as the Manager of the said school as an interim arrangement. It is also true that the petitioner is one of the legal heirs of the owner and approved Manager Sri.K.Unnikrishnan, who died on 7.10.2007. But admittedly, the petitioner is a Clerk in the said school and there is a statutory bar in terms of Rule 8 (1) of Chapter III of Kerala Education Rules for his functioning as Manager of the school. There is no specific provision under Chapter III of the KER for granting exemption from the operation of Rule 8(1). Envisaging such a situation, the petitioner has approached the first respondent by filing Ext.P4 representation requesting to invoke the power under Rule 3 of Chapter I of KER. Rule 3 of Chapter I of KER enables the Government to exercise the said power in special cases to dispense with or relax the requirements of a particular rule under the KER. Since the

¶27

W.P.(C) NO.14784/2010

¶28

¶29

petitioner has already approached the first respondent by filing Ext.P4, I do not think it necessary to consider the issues involved in the matter at this stage. The first respondent is bound to consider the same and pass orders on Ext.P4. In the said circumstances, without making any observations as to the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation submitted by the petitioner expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to other legal heirs of Sri.K.Unnikrishnan, the owner and approved Manager of the school, who died on 7.10.2007.

¶30

(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)

¶31

spc

¶32

W.P.(C) NO.14784/2010

¶33

¶34

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶35

W.P.(C). NO. 14784 /2010

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

9th June, 2010

M.Sasikumar v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Sasikumar v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Vs Senior Joint Diretor (P.S) and Others

K.Rajan Vs State of Kerala

F.Raheedakunju Vs State of Kerala

P.Praveenkumar Vs the Chairman-Cum-Managing Director

Elsy P.Oomman Vs State of Kerala

P.C.Supriya Vs State of Kerala