Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE MANAGER, A.M.L.P.SCHOOL versus THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


THE MANAGER, A.M.L.P.SCHOOL v. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT - WP(C) No. 21769 of 2007(N) [2007] RD-KL 13205 (16 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 21769 of 2007(N)

1. THE MANAGER, A.M.L.P.SCHOOL,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
... Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,

3. THE SECRETARY,

For Petitioner :SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER

Dated :16/07/2007

O R D E R

A.K.BASHEER, J.

W.P.(C)No.21769 OF 2007

Dated this the 16th day of July, 2007



JUDGMENT

Petitioner is stated to be the manager of A.M.L.P. School at Kottamthala in Malappuram District. He claims that his request for upgradation of the school as Upper Primary, is likely to be allowed, particularly in the light of the new guidelines issued by the Government in Ext.P2 order. For this purpose, recommendation of the local Panchayat is necessary as stipulated in Ext.P2. Learned counsel points out that petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 request before respondent no.3, Secretary, Parappanangadi Grama Panchayat. The limited prayer in this writ petition is to issue an appropriate direction to respondent no.3 to place the request made by the petitioner before the meeting of the Panchayat for consideration.

2. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the materials on record, I do not deem it necessary to issue notice to the respondents. In my view the writ petition can be disposed of with appropriate directions. W.P.(C)No.21769 OF 2007 Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.3 to place the request, if any, that is stated to have been submitted by the petitioner before the committee of the Panchayat in accordance with law and the relevant rules of procedure for consideration. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to mention that petitioner shall be afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before any decision is taken in the matter, if found necessary. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with a certified copy of the judgment before respondent no.3 for compliance.

A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE

jes


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.