Writ appeal disposed noting pending State revision, leaving contentions open.

The appellant, who is the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.31148 of 2025, has filed this writ appeal, invoking the provisions underSection 5(i) of theKerala High Court Act, 1958, challenging the judgment dated 20.11.2025 of the learned Single Judge in that writ petition, as modified by the order dated 06.02.2026 of the learned Single Judge in R.P.No.1675 of 2025. This writ appeal is one filed along with C.M.Application No.1 of 2026 to condone the filing delay of 58 days, which was condoned by a separate order dated 08.04.2026.

2. We heard arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 6, the learned counsel for the 7^th respondent Manager and also the learned counsel for the 11^th respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner would submit that by the judgment dated 20.11.2025, the learned Single Judge disposed of W.P.(C)No.31148 of 2025, by directing the competent among the respondents to implement Ext.P17 order dated 30.10.2025 of the 3^rd respondent Deputy Director of Education, Thrissur. The 7^th respondent Manager has filed a revision petition before the 2^nd respondent Director of General Education against Ext.P17 order, which was pending consideration at the time of disposal of W.P.(C)No.31148 of 2025. Therefore, by the order dated 06.02.2026 in R.P.No.1675 of 2025, the learned Single Judge ordered that the direction contained in the judgment dated 20.11.2025 in W.P.(C)No.31148 of 2025 will be complied with after a decision is taken by the 2^nd respondent Director of General Education in the revision petition filed by the 7^th respondent Manager against Ext.P17 order. During the pendency of this writ appeal, the 2^nd respondent Director of General Education has already rejected the revision petition filed by the 7^th respondent Manager, which is now under challenge in a revision petition filed by the Manager before the 1^st respondent State.

4. The learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 6 and also the learned counsel for the 7^th respondent Manager would submit that the order passed by the 2^nd respondent Director of General Education in the revision petition filed by the 7^th respondent Manager against Ext.P17 order dated 30.10.2025 of the 3^rd respondent Deputy Director of Education is now under challenge in a revision petition filed by the Manager before the 1^st respondent State.

Based on the aforesaid submissions made at the Bar, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ appeal, taking note of the pendency of a revision petition filed by the 7^th respondent Manager before the 1^st respondent State against the order passed by the 2^nd respondent Director of General Education in the revision petition filed against Ext.P17 order of the 3^rd respondent Deputy Director of Education. The legal and factual contentions raised by both sides are left open to be raised before the 1^st respondent State at the appropriate stage.