Disposed

Ajeesh B., v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Jul 2022WP(C)/5215/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the 1st respondent to consider a pending revision petition S2/297/21 expeditiously within two months, following the law in a cited Division Bench judgment, after hearing all parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider revision petition S2/297/21 within two months, affording oral hearing, and acting pursuant to a cited Division Bench judgment.

Ajeesh B., Vs the State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 5215 OF 2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 5215 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

AJEESH B., AGED 36 YEARS,S/O. BHASKARAN, KAIPPARAYIL HOUSE, NECHOOR P.O., NEERKKUZHI, PIRAVOM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 686 664, CURRENTLY WORKING AS OFFICE ATTENDANT (DAILY WAGES), FORMERLY KNOWN AS M.G.U.P. PERUMBILLY (UPS PERUMBILLY), MULANTHURUTHY, PIN-682 314.

¶8

BY ADVS. SHERRY J. THOMAS SUJAN.A JOEMON ANTONY RENISH RAVEENDRAN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

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

¶11

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695 014. 3 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICR, NTA, NEAR KANAYANNUR TALUK OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. 4 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE, MAIN ROAD, SH 15, THRIPUNITHURA ERNAKULAM, KERALA 682 301.

¶12

WP(C) NO. 5215 OF 2022

¶13

¶14

5 THE HEAD MASTER, M.G.U.P. PERUMPILLY (UPS PERUMPILLY), MULANTHURUTHY, PIN- 682 314.

¶15

6 M.G. U.P. PERUMPILLY (UPS PERUMPILLY), MULANTHURUTHY 682 314, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

¶16

BY ADV SYABILY P.S.

¶17

SMT. ANIMA M., GP

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C) NO. 5215 OF 2022

¶20

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The petitioner states that he was appointed as an Office Attendant in the

¶23

M.G.U.P. School, Perumpilly, on 12.11.2015 in a retirement vacancy. However,

¶24

the 4th respondent, relying on Ext.P3 circular, refused to grant approval of his appointment on the ground that the school is uneconomic. Ext.P2 is the copy of the said order. Though the Manager had preferred an appeal, the same was rejected on the same ground. The petitioner asserts that the issue raised by the petitioner is covered by Ext.P6 judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court. According to the petitioner, while disposing of the matter, the Division Bench had occasion to observe that the appointment of an Office Attendant is mandatory as per the provisions of the Kerala Education Rules and it has nothing to do with whether the school is economic or uneconomic. It is contended that being aggrieved by the rejection order, the petitioner has preferred a revision petition, which has been numbered as S2/297/21 and is pending before the 1st respondent.

¶25

When the writ petition was taken up for consideration, Sri. Sherry J

¶26

Thomas, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, for the

¶27

WP(C) NO. 5215 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

time being, the petitioner would be satisfied if directions are issued to the 1st respondent to consider the revision petition, numbered as S2/297/21, in the

¶30

light of the law laid down by this Court in Ext.P6 judgment, within a time frame and with due notice.

¶31

I have heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

¶32

After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar, and the facts and circumstances,

¶33

I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by issuing the

¶34

following directions:

¶35

a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up,

¶36

consider and pass appropriate orders on the revision petition, numbered as S2/297/21 which is stated to be pending, in the light of the law laid down by this Court in Ext.P6 judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or his authorized representative and respondents 5 and 6.

¶37

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously,

¶38

WP(C) NO. 5215 OF 2022

¶39

¶40

in any event, within a period of two months from the date of

¶41

production of a copy of this judgment.

¶42

c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of

¶43

the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned

¶44

respondent for further action.

¶45

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

¶50

WP(C) NO. 5215 OF 2022

¶51

¶52

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5215/2022

¶53

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :

¶54

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 12.11.2015. Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.3.2016. Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 6.11.2012.

¶55

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE HEADMASTER OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT SCHOOL WHICH SHOWS THE CONTINUATION OF PETITIONER. Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS THE 4TH RESPONDENT HAS ALSO ADMITTED THAT THE PETITIONER-THE POST OF OFFICE ATTENDANT DATED 15.7.2019. Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.11.2021 IN WRIT APPEAL NO. 1358/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES.

¶56

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL

Ajeesh B., v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajeesh B., 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

Cases cited

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

Abhaya .K.S 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