Disposed

Abhaya .K.S v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Jul 2022WP(C)/3261/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court directed the Government to dispose of pending revision petitions lodged by three teachers within three months. The Court held that the cited Government Order was inapplicable and disposed of the writ petition by issuing directions rather than quashing existing orders.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider revision petitions P6-P8 within three months after affording opportunity of hearing.

Abhaya .K.S Vs the State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1944

¶3

WP(C) NO. 3261 OF 2022

¶4

PETITIONER/S:

¶5

1ABHAYA .K.S
AGED 36 YEARS
W/O.SURESH BABU, HST(MALAYALAM),
CHENTHRAPINNI HSS, PO.CHENTHRAPINNI,
THRISSUR DIST-680687,
(RESIDING AT ERATTU HOUSE, CHAKKARAPADAM,
P.O.PERINJANAM, PIN-680686).

¶6

2VARSHA.K.S,
AGED 34 YEARS
W/O.PRADEEEP.K.V, HST(MALAYALAM),
CAHENTHRAPINNI HSS, P.O.CHENTHRAPPINNI, THRISSUR
DIST-680687(RESIDING AT KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE,
CHELOOR, IRINJALAKUDA.P.O, THRISSUR-680121).

¶7

3TEENA.P.S,
AGED 34 YEARS
W/O.SIJO.P.S, HST(MATHEMATICS),
CHENTHRAPINNI HSS, P.O.CHENTRAPINNI,
THRISSUR DIST-680687
(RESIDING AT PANANGATTU HOUSE, KAVILKADAVU,
KODUNGALLUR-680664).

¶8

BY ADVS.
T.T.MUHAMOOD
A.RENJIT
V.E.ABDUL GAFOOR
A.MOHAMMED SAVAD
NAZEER HUZAIN.H
T.R.VISHNU

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,

¶11

WP(C) NO. 3261 OF 2022

¶12

¶13

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF THE DDE,
THRISSUR,PIN-680001.
3THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE DEO, CHAVAKKAD,
THRISSUR-680506.
4THE MANAGER,
CHENTHRAPINNI HSS, P.O.CHENTHRAPINNI,
THRISSUR DISTRICT-680687.
SMT NISHA BOSE SR GP
THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFOR
ADMISSIONON04.07.2022,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C) NO. 3261 OF 2022

¶15

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioners state that they are working as High School Teachers (HSTs) in the Chenthrapinni Higher Secondary School, an aided school managed by the 4th respondent. It is contended that the 3rd respondent as per Exhibits P2 to P4 orders has approved the appointment of the petitioners. However, while passing the said order, directions have been issued to treat the period from the date of appointment till 06.02.2021 as notional. Being aggrieved, the petitioners stated to have preferred Exhibits P6 to P8 revision petitions before the 1st respondent, which are stated to be pending. It is in the afore circumstances, that this writ petition is filed seeking to quash Exhibit P2 to P4, and for further directions to the 1st respondent to consider the pending revision petitions.

¶18

Sri. T.T. Muhamood, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that Exhibits P2 to P4 orders were passed based on Exhibit P5 Government Order, which is inapplicable. According to the learned counsel, for the time being, the petitioners would be satisfied if directions are issued to the 1st respondent to take up and consider the revision petitions within a time frame with due notice.

¶19

WP(C) NO. 3261 OF 2022

¶20

¶21

I have heard the learned Government Pleader as well. In

¶22

view of the nature of the order that I propose to pass, notice to the 4th respondent is dispensed with.

¶23

After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar, and the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by issuing the following directions:

¶24

a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibits P6 to P8 revision petitions, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioners herein or their authorized representative and the 4th respondent.

¶25

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶26

c) It would be open to the petitioners to produce a

¶27

WP(C) NO. 3261 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

copy of the writ petition along with the judgment before the

¶30

concerned respondent for further action.

¶31

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

avs

¶36

WP(C) NO. 3261 OF 2022

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3261/2022

¶39

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶40

`Exhibit P1`	`TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B2/1693/2019/K.DIS DATED` `30.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT,` `REJECTING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE 3RD` `PETITIONER.`
`Exhibit P2`	`TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B2/28930/2021 DATED` `06.09.2021.`
`Exhibit P3`	`TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B2/28931/2021 DATED` `10.09.2021.`
`Exhibit P4`	`TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B2-28932/2021 DATED` `06.09.2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit P5`	`TRUE COPY OF GO(P)NO.4/2021/G.EDN DATED` `06.02.2021`
`Exhibit P6`	`TRUE COPY OF REVISION PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE` `1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON` `18.12.2021.`
`Exhibit P7`	`TRUE COPY OF REVISION PETITION DATED 18.12.2021` `SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST` `RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit P8`	`TRUE COPY OF REVISION PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE` `3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON` `18.12.2021.`

Abhaya .K.S v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhaya .K.S 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jyothi M Vs State of Kerala

K.B.Krishnaraj Vs State of Kerala

Fr.Johny Sebastian, Vs the State of Kerala

Ajeesh B., Vs the State of Kerala

Secretary,Corporate Management of Schools Under the Society of the Order of Sacred Transfiguration Vs State of Kerala

Sismi Thomas Vs State of Kerala