P. SNINEESH, HINDI TEACHER Vs. STATE OF KERALA,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P6, an order dated 30/1/2007 passed by the 1st respondent rejecting Ext.P12 revision filed by the Manager of an aided school.

(2.) FACTS of the case are that the 4th respondent's father Sri Appukuttan Nair was a peon in the school, of which the 3rd respondent is the Manager. He expired on 9/9/1988. The 4th respondent submits that claiming employment on compassionate grounds, he submitted Ext.R4(a) application dated 2/5/90 to the then Manager. The application was entertained and Ext.R4(b) reply dated 4/6/90 was given informing the 4th respondent that there was no vacancy of Hindi teacher available then and that as and when a vacancy arises, his claim will be considered. Again, according to the 4th respondent, on 16/5/97, pointing out that a vacancy of Hindi teacher was due to arise in 2002, he submitted Ext.R4(c) application to the Manager. Although this application was also received by the Manager, the 4th respondent submitted Ext.R4(d) dated 25/5/2002, a further application in the prescribed format for compassionate appointment.

(3.) THE Manager challenged Ext.P1 order of the AEO by filing Ext.P12 revision before the Government, which was rejected by Ext.P2 order dated 3/3/2005. That order was subject matter of challenge before this Court in WP(C) Nos. 8849, 9089 and 9952/05 filed by all the parties. By Ext.P3 common judgment, this Court quashed Ext.P2 order passed by the Government and directed reconsideration of the matter. Paragraph 4 and 5 of the judgment being relevant, are extracted below for reference.