AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 187 wordsKURIAN JOSEPH, J.
Issue notice. Mr. S. Rajappa, who appears on caveat, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
Leave granted.
Having heard the learned senior counsel appearing on both sides, we find that it would be in the fitness of things that the District Education Officer takes a fresh decision in place of the earlier decision taken on 13.04.2018 after hearing all the parties, since that is the genesis of the dispute arising in the present appeal.
Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of with a direction to Respondent No. 4 - District Education Officer, Cheranmahadevi, to take a fresh decision in place of his earlier decision dated 13.04.2018, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant and Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6.
The approval allegedly granted to the sixth respondent by the District Education Officer will be subject to the decision thus taken by him. The fourth respondent shall take a decision expeditiously and at any rate, within a period of three months. The status quo obtaining as on today shall continue till such time.
No costs.