Kerala High Court
Haseena Beegum N vs The State Of Kerala on 23 November, 2021
WP(C) NO. 26295 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 26295 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
HASEENA BEEGUM N.
AGED 45 YEARS
WIFE OF SALAM, ARABIC TEACHER,
D V U P SCHOOL, VENDAR,KULAKKADA,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-691507.
BY ADVS.
V.A.MUHAMMED
M.SAJJAD
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
KOLLAM AT THEVALLY-691009.
3 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
KULAKKADA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691521.
4 THE MANAGER,
D V U P SCHOOL, VENDAR, KULAKKADA,
KOLLAM-691507.
5 THE HEADMASTER,
D V U P SCHOOL, VENDAR, KULAKKADA,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-691507.
SRI BIJOY CHANDRAN, SR. GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 26295 OF 2021 2
JUDGMENT
By Ext.P1 order the petitioner was appointed as Arabic Teacher (Part
Time) in the DVUP School with effect from 05.06.2006. Her appointment was
approved only on 1.6.2011 and since then she has been continuing in service
with salary. Her grievance in this writ petition concerns the non-approval of
her appointment from 05.06.2006. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner
is stated to have preferred Exhibit P7 representation before the Government. It
is in the aforesaid circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court
seeking to quash Exhibits P1 (a) and P3 and for incidental reliefs.
2. Sri M Sajjad, The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submitted that the limited request of the petitioner before this Court at this
stage is for expeditious consideration of Exhibit P7 by the 1st respondent in
the light of Exhibit P8 order passed by the Government in the case of a
similarly placed teacher.
3. I have heard Sri.Bijoy Chandran, the learned Senior Government
Pleader.
4. 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 by
issuing the following directions:
a) The 1st respondent is directed to take up consider and pass
orders on Exhibit P7 representation filed by the petitioner
with notice to the petitioner as well as the respondents 4
and 5 and take a decision, as per procedure and in
accordance with the law, expeditiously, in any event, within
a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy
of this judgment.
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.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
IAP
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26295/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE
PETITIONER DATED 05.06.2006
EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C-5848/11/DDIS
DATED 26.12.2011 OF THE AEO, KULAKKADA
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER
2007-2008 DATED 04.08.2010 OF THE AEO,
KULAKKADA
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER
NO.38495/S1/13/G.EDN.DATED 26.03.2014 OF
THE GOVT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
W.A.NO.2290/2015 DATED 25.07.2017
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
W.A.NO.2091/2018 DATED 28.06.2019.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER
NO.60930/J2/11/G.EDN .DATED 25.10.2011
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
01.09.2021 FILED BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.
(RT)NO.153/2020/G.EDN.DATED 10.01.2020 OF
THE GOVERNMENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
LU
