2025:KER:31489 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 15476 OF 2025 PETITIONER: JINI JOY C AGED 34 YEARS W/O VIMAG SANAL LPST, SCUP SCHOOL, CHALISSERY, PALAKKAD RESIDING AT CHUNGATH HOUSE KADANGODE P O, PARAPPURAM THRISSUR, PIN - 680584 BY ADVS. U.BALAGANGADHARAN NAMITHA GEORGE RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT (ANNEX) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014 3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION CIVIL STATION, ROBINSON ROAD, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001 2025:KER:31489 WP(C) No.15476 of 2025 2 4 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER THRITHALA POST OFFICE PALAKKAD, PIN - 679534 5 THE CORPORATE MANAGER, MALABAR INDEPENDENT SYRIAN CHURCH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, THOZHIYUR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680520 BY ADV. SMT. ANIMA. M., GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:31489 WP(C) No.15476 of 2025 3 JUDGMENT Dated this the 10th day of April, 2025 Petitioner was appointed as Lower Primary School Teacher at SCUP School, Chalissery, on 01.01.2020 following the retirement of a permanent teacher. However, the appointment order was issued on 10.03.2022 after a regularisation order by the Corporate Manager on 05.03.2022. The regularisation was pursuant to a Court Order in W.P.(C) No.12889/2021. 2. Despite being qualified and selected, the petitioner's appointment was rejected by the Assistant Educational Officer on 12.07.2023, citing technical objections. The new school manager has filed a Revision Petition against this rejection. The petitioner is seeking intervention of this Court for approval of the appointment. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing 2025:KER:31489 WP(C) No.15476 of 2025 4 respondents 1 to 4. 4. From the pleadings in the writ petition, it is discernible that aggrieved by the non-approval of the petitioner’s appointment, the Manager has preferred Ext.P4 Revision Petition before the 2nd respondent. As Ext.P4 is a statutory Revision Petition, it would be only just and proper that the revisional authority considers the same and passes appropriate orders thereon within a reasonable time. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 Revision Petition filed by the Manager, if it is received and pending, and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of three months, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the Manager. Sd/- N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk 2025:KER:31489 WP(C) No.15476 of 2025 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15476/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P.1 A TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER NO. 63/2021- 22 DATED 10.3.2022 ISSUED BY THE CORPORATE MANAGER -5TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P.2 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. CT 54/2021-22 OF CORPORATE MANAGER [5TH RESPONDENT] DATED 5.3.2022 Exhibit P.3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. D/42364/2023 DATED 12.7.2023 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P.4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE MANAGER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 22.7.2024