The Court set aside an order cancelling a teacher's appointment and directed the Education Department to approve the appointment as the petitioner subsequently relinquished his promotion claim.
Ext.P5 set aside; direction to first respondent to consider approval of second petitioner's appointment and disburse consequential benefits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932
WP(C).No. 374 of 2010(V) ------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA
RESPONDENT(S):
ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL FOR R4
GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SANIL KUMAR K FOR R1 TO R3
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 374/10
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
// True Copy //
P.A. To Judge
C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J.
W.P.(C) No. 374 of 2010 V
Dated this the 24th day of June, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners are respectively the Manager and Higher Secondary School Teacher(Junior) in Arabic of Seethi Sahib Memorial Higher Secondary School, Theyyalingal in Malappuram District. The second petitioner's appointment to the aforesaid post was cancelled as per Ext.P5 at the instance of the fourth respondent. It is challenging Ext.P5 order and seeking consequential reliefs that this writ petition has been filed. During the pendency of this writ petition, the fourth respondent has relinquished his claim for promotion as HSST(Junior)-Arabic against the vacancy to which the second petitioner was promoted. Ext.P12 is the relinquishment letter of the fourth respondent on the aforesaid lines. In the light of Ext.P12, Ext.P5 requires reconsideration. Admittedly, Ext.P5 was issued taking into account the claim put forth by the fourth respondent. In fact, the fourth respondent himself got withdrawn W.P.(C) No.5049/2010 filed by him based on Ext.P12 relinquishment letter. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, to enable the first respondent to
WPC.374/2010
: 2 :
reconsider the question of approval of appointment of the second petitioner, Ext.P5 is set aside. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider the question of approval of appointment of the second petitioner as HSST(Junior)Arabic in the first petitioner's school made as per Ext.P1 order, in the light of Ext.P12. Needless to say that appropriate steps to disburse the consequential benefits shall also be taken expeditiously.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
(C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)
aks
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appointment order against the second petitioner should be reconsidered in view of the relinquishment of the fourth respondent's claim.
Whether the order dated 14-12-2009 (Ext.P5) must be set aside to enable the first respondent to approve the second petitioner's appointment.
The Manager, Seethi Sahib Memorial Higher Secondary School
V.P.Asharaf
The State of Kerala represented by its Secretary to Government, General Education Department
The Director of Higher Secondary Education Housing Board Buildings
The Regional Deputy Director, Higher Secondary Education, Kozhikode
Mr. Pockerkutty.M.K
C.T.Ravikumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
