The Court quashed an order issued without a hearing, directing the authority to reconsider a representation after hearing the petitioner and the college principal within two months.
The impugned order (Ext.P6) set aside; the 3rd respondent directed to reconsider Ext.P5 and dispose of the same after hearing the petitioner and 4th respondent within two months.
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 DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA,
1944
WP(C) NO. 12526 OF 2022
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
RAJEEV K.S., AGED 60 YEARS
S/O.SANAKARAN, KODAIKKATTIL VEEDU, PERINGOTTUKARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 515.
BY ADVS. GEORGE SEBASTIAN ARUN LUCKOSE ABRAHAM
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
SRI.JOSHY THANNICKKAMATTAM -GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 12526 OF 2022
2
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
W.P(C) No. 12526 of 2022
Dated this the 02nd day of December, 2022
JUDGMENT
Amidst the various assertions, averments and allegations made and urged in this Writ Petition, when this matter was called today, Sri.George Sebastian – learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that his client will be satisfied if the competent respondent is directed to reconsider Ext.P5 representation - since the impugned Ext.P6 order issued based on it – has been settled even without hearing him. He added that, he is confident that if this Court is inclined to direct the Competent Authority to hear his client also, then a contra-view is possible than what has been recorded in Ext.P6.
WP(C) NO. 12526 OF 2022
3
In the afore circumstances, I allow this Writ Petition and set aside Ext.P6; with a consequential direction to the 3rd respondent to reconsider Ext.P5 and dispose of the same, after hearing the petitioner and also the 4th respondent – Principal; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Needless to say, even though this Court has not entered into the merits of the rival contentions of the parties, or into the contents of Ext.P6, the 3rd respondent will comply with the afore directions dispassionately and de hors the opinion which he has earlier entered into.
Sd/-DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE
lsn
WP(C) NO. 12526 OF 2022
4
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
| Exhibit P1 | A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.8.2008 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. |
|---|---|
| Exhibit P2 | A TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSAL GIVEN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31.12.2020. |
| Exhibit P3 | A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 16.3.2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. |
| Exhibit P4 | A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 31.5.2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. |
| Exhibit P5 | A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.7.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| Exhibit P6 | A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 27.1.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. |
| Exhibit P7 | A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF G.O.(P) NO.7/2016/FIN. DATED 20.1.2016. |
| Exhibit P8 | A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF G.O.(P) NO.85/2011/FIN. DATED 26.2.2011. |
| Exhibit P9 | A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.11.2016 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. |
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
TRUE COPY
P.A TO JUDGE
LSN
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order was passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard in contravention of principles of natural justice.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajeev K.S.
State of Kerala
Director of Collegiate Education
Deputy Director of Collegiate Education
Principal, S.N.College Nattika
Devan Ramachandran
Justice Devan Ramachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
