C.C. Aboobacker vs The State of Kerala and Others

K.T. Sankaran, J.—The petitioner was appointed as LPSA in A.M.L.P School, Klari Puthur, for the period from 1.1.2003 to 30.4.2003 in a maternity leave vacancy. The Assistant Educational Officer, Tanur rejected the proposal for approval of the appointment of the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner was under the honest belief that the Manager had filed appeal against order of the Assistant Educational Officer. The petitioner states that he left India for taking up employment abroad. Subsequently, on coming to know that the Manager had not filed appeal against the order passed by the Assistant Educational Officer, the petitioner filed Ext.P2 appeal dated 28.6.2008 before the Director of Public Instruction. It is stated that the appeal was sent through the Consulate General of India at Jiddah. The Director of Public Instruction rejected the appeal, as per Ext.P4 order dated 24.4.2009. The petitioner contends that Ext.P4 order was passed without affording an opportunity of being heard to him. Challenging Ext.P4 order, the petitioner filed Ext.P8 revision dated 20th August, 2010 before the first respondent. Ext.P8 revision is pending disposal.

The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner in the Writ Petition are the following:

i) call for the records relating to Exts.P4 and P5 and quash the originals of the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order.

ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 3rd respondent Assistant Educational Officer, Tanur to approve the appointment of the petitioner as LPSA from 1.1.2003 to 30.4.2003 and disburse the salary and allowances forthwith.

iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 4th respondent Manager to re-appoint the petitioner in the existing or arising vacancy of LPSA forthwith.

iv) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to effectively consider and pass appropriate orders upon Ext.P8 after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner within a time limit.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the time being, it is sufficient if relief No. (iv) is granted.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P8 revision filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. The petitioner shall also send a copy of the Writ Petition and a copy of the judgment to respondents 4 and 5 and he shall produce proof of the same before the first respondent.