Simy vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 2533 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

      FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 2ND MAGHA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.27386 OF 2012(W)


PETITIONER:

               SIMY, AGED 40 YEARS
               D/O SHAHUL HAMEED SALIM, FIRDOUS,
               B1, TC6/418/43, J.B.SQUARE,
               VATTIYOORKAVU PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

               BY ADV. SRI.S.R.DAYANANDA PRABHU

RESPONDENTS:

      1        STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
               HIGH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

      2        THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
               CENTRE FOR ADVANCED PRINTGING &
               TRAINING CENTRE VATTIYOORKAVU,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 013

      3        ABU N., S/O NOORUDEEN KUTTY,
               CENTRE FOR ADVANCED PRINTING & TRAINING
               CENTRE VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
               NOW WORKING ON DEPUTATION IN BEVERAGES
               CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 013


               BY ADVS.
               SRI.K.ANAND SR.
               SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN
               SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
               SRI.M.SAJJAD
               SMT.K.K.RAZIYA , SC,
               SRI. SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE - GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD        ON
22.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 27386/12
                                       2



                                    JUDGMENT

When this matter was called today,

Sri.S.R.Dayananda Prabhu - learned counsel for

the petitioner, conceded that pending this

lis, Ext.R3(L) judgment was delivered by a

learned Division Bench of this Court in

W.A.No.211/2015 and connected matters. He

submitted that in terms of the liberty granted

to his client in paragraph 6 of the said

judgment, she has already preferred a

representation before the Government and

pleads that same be directed to be taken up

and disposed of at the earliest. He says that

if this is granted, no further reliefs are

required in this Writ Petition.

2. The learned Government Pleader -

Sri.Sunil Kumar Kuriakose, submitted that if

the petitioner is confining her plea as afore,

his clients will not stand in the way of this

Writ Petition being disposed of; but added WPC 27386/12

that the representation said to have been

filed by her has not yet been produced on

record. He submitted that, however, if the

representation is still pending before the

competent Authority, said Authority will

dispose it of, after following due procedure

and after hearing all parties, without any

further delay.

3. When I consider the request made by

the learned counsel for the petitioner as

afore, it is indubitable that I am

incapacitated from passing a firm order on

account of the fact that the representation,

said to have been filed by his client, has not

been produced on record and also because same

has been preferred on the strength of the

liberty granted by the learned Division Bench.

4. Nevertheless, I am of the view, so as

to obtain substantial justice to all parties,

that there will be no prejudice to anyone if WPC 27386/12

this Court is to direct the competent

Secretary of the Government to consider and

pass orders on the representation preferred by

the petitioner at the earliest.

Resultantly, this Writ Petition is

disposed of without considering any of the

reliefs sought for; however, directing the

competent Secretary of the Government to act

in terms of the directions in Ext.R3(L)

judgment - if the petitioner has already

preferred a representation in terms of

paragraph 6 thereof - and to dispose it of,

after affording all parties an opportunity of

being heard - either physically or through

videoconferencing - as expeditiously as is

possible, but not later than four months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

Sd/-

                                                       DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
      RR                                                        JUDGE
 WPC 27386/12



                           APPENDIX
      PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

      EXHIBIT P1        TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED
                        03/07/1995.

      EXHIBIT P2        TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC
                        NO16923/2011.

      EXHIBIT P3        TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED

15/11/2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 20/11/2012 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 23/12/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29/10/2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE CHAIRMAN AND MINISTER FOR EDUCATION.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 02/02/2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE CHAIRMAN AND MINISTER FOR EDUCATION.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 06/09/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 23/11/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 04/01/2005 SUBMITTED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA FOR THE 39TH EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE WPC 27386/12

PROPOSED ON 24/11/2011.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT R2(A) TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 29/10/2004 SUBMITTED 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT R2(B) TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT R2(C) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED04/01/2005 SUBMITTED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT R3(I) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO.211/2015 DATED 23/03/2015.