WP(C) NO. 22125 OF 2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 22125 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
VICTORIA SHEPARD,
W/O. ROBIN M.K., MEMANA, ARAKKULAM PO, IDUKKI-
685591 (HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (MATHS), ST. THOMAS
HIGH SCHOOL, THUDANGANAD)
BY ADV S.SUBHASH CHAND
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
(FORMERLY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS),
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
THODUPUZHA-685584.
4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
KANJIRAPPALLY-686507
5 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
THODUPUZHA-685584.
WP(C) NO. 22125 OF 2022 2
6 THE CORPORATE MANAGER,
CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, DIOCESE OF PALAI-
686575.
SMT NISHA BOSE, SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 22125 OF 2022 3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court contending that she is entitled to have her service regularised for the period from 01.06.2015 to 31.05.2016 in the cadre of Upper Primary School Teacher. When the request made by the petitioner was denied, the petitioner is stated to have preferred Ext.P5 revision petition before the 1st respondent. The prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 expeditiously, with due notice.
2. Heard Sri.Subhash Chand S, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Nisha Bose, the learned Senior Government Pleader. In view of the nature of the order that I propose to pass, notice to the 6th respondent is dispensed with.
3. After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:
a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5, after affording WP(C) NO. 22125 OF 2022 4 an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorised representative and the 6th respondent.
b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent for further action.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE IAP WP(C) NO. 22125 OF 2022 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22125/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVED APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 3.6.2013 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.6 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVED APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1.6.2015 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.6 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.25/2016 (2) DATED 8.8.2016 THUS PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.6 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVED APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1.6.2017 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.6 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STATUTORY REVISION PETITION DATED 6.5.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE RESPONDENT NO.1 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
NIL