RATNAMANI.K. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: i. Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other Writ order or direction commanding the 4th respondent to appointment the petitioner as HSST (Jr.) in Mathematics in Rajah's H.S.S. from the date of occurrence of vacancy. ii. declare that the 2nd and 3rd respondents are duty bound to ensure compliance of Ext. P11 order by the 4th respondent. iii. Issue any other Writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the cases.

(2.) HEARD , the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent (Manager of the School), the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent and the learned Government Pleader for the other respondents as well.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioner is mainly with regard to the non implementation of Exhibit P11 order passed by the third respondent. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent that, being aggrieved of Exhibit P11 order, the fifth respondent has already moved a Revision Petition before the Government (first respondent) under Rule 92 of Chapter XIV (A) KER. It is also stated that the said respondent had approached this Court by filing which was disposed of, as per judgment dated 29.05.2014, directing the first respondent to consider the Revision Petition and to have it finalized in accordance with law, within four months, and that the said proceedings are still to be finalized. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of, making it clear that implementation of Exhibit P11 shall only be with reference to the orders to be passed by the first respondent on the Revision Petition stated as preferred by the firth respondent, after hearing all the parties concerned, as already directed by this Court, as per the judgment dated 29.05.2014.