Disposed

Manager v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 Nov 2012WP(C)/25471/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition by directing the third respondent (AO) to consider the petitioner's application for school recognition within one month and forward it to the first respondent (Director) for a decision within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P1 within one month and send it to the 1st respondent for a decision within two months.

Manager Vs State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/5TH AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 25471 of 2012 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

MANAGER, NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, NELLIMOODDU, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY SRI.KRB.KAIMAL,SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADV. SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.

¶11

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 014.

¶12

3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 501.

¶13

R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.A.FAYAZ

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Kss

¶16

WPC.NO.25471/2012 H

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶19

EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 29/02/2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT (EXCLUDING THE VOLUMINOUS DOCUMENTS ATTACHED TO IT).

¶20

EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 09/03/2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE IST RESPONDENT.

¶21

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

Kss

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶26

¶27

W.P.(c) No.25471 OF 2012

¶28

¶29

Dated this the 26^th day of November , 2012

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

The petitioner - Manager of New Higher Secondary School, Nellimoodu is before this Court seeking for recognition to the U.P.School, which was started nearly two decades back. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has got all the necessary infrastructure for imparting education to the children in the school and that the rights and liberties of the petitioner as well as the students to have such education in a recognised institution stand crystalised by virtue of the mandate under Rule 14 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules 2011. It is in the said circumstance that the petitioner has approached the respondents by filing necessary proceedings, which however are still to be considered and hence is sought to be intercepted by this Court.

¶32

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

¶33

Considering the limited nature of the relief sought for, this

¶34

Court does not intend to deal with the merits or as to the rights and

¶35

W.P.(C)No.25471/2012 2

¶36

liberties, as the matter has to be considered by the concerned respondent at the first instance.

¶37

In the said circumstance, the third respondent is directed to consider Ext.P1 application preferred by the petitioner in tune with the aforesaid rules and to cause the same to be placed before the first respondent for appropriate decision. This exercise shall be completed within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of the proceedings as above, the first respondent shall consider Ext.P2 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the earliest, at any rate within two months thereafter.

¶38

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the third respondent for further steps.

¶39

Writ petition is disposed of.

¶40

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶41

sv.

¶42

W.P.(C)No.25471/2012 2

¶43

W.P.(C)No.25471/2012 2

Manager v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manager v. 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

St.Mary Davis Vs the State of Kerala

K.Deepa Vs the State of Kerala

Sudheesh S.Panicker Vs the State of Kerala and Others

Thankamani Vs Smt. K.M. Karthyayani

K.S.Srelekha Vs State of Kerala

Suresan Kumbhanilath Vs State of Kerala