Smitha Raphel K vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 18542 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
  WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 17TH BHADRA,
                                    1943
                        WP(C) NO. 18313 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

               SMITHA RAPHEL K.
               AGED 44 YEARS
               W/O.SANDOSH THANNIPPILLY, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL
               TEACHER (UNAPPROVED), ST.JOSEPHS HSS THALASSERY,
               THALASSERY P.O., KANNUR DIST., PIN -670 101,
               RESIDING AT THANNIPPILLY HOUSE, KANDANKALI,
               PAYYANNUR P.O., KANNUR DIST., PIN - 670 306.

               BY ADV MURALI PALLATH


RESPONDENT/S:

    1          THE STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
               GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT
               (ANNEX II), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

    2          THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
               JAGATHI, THYCAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
               695 014.

    3          THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
               KANNUR, THANA P.O., KANNUR DIST., PIN - 670 002.

    4          THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
               TALIPARAMBA, MINI CIVIL STATION, TALIPARAMBA,
               KANNUR DIST., PIN - 670 141.

    5          THE CORPORATE MANAGER
               URSULINE CONVENT, EDL AGENCY, UMI, KANNUR, PIN -
               670 001.

               SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN-GP


        THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION       ON   08.09.2021,     THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18313 OF 2021                   2




                               JUDGMENT

Petitioner is aggrieved by the non approval of her appointment as

UPSA in the school of the 5th respondent -Corporate manager. Ext.P8

revision preferred by the 5th respondent before the first respondent

challenging Ext.P4 order is pending. Grievance of the petitioner is that

the above statutory revision is not disposed of even now.

2. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government Pleader, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition

itself at the thresh hold, by directing the first respondent-Government to

consider Ext.P8 revision, as expeditiously as possible and to dispose it

of, after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as

well as the 5th respondent, either physically or, if not possible, through

virtual mode, in accordance with law, within three months from the date

of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

Judge

dpk

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18313/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 15/09/2010 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B1/8517/10/K.DIS.

DATED 12/06/2012.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B4/11529/12/K.DIS. DATED 30/09/2013.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.K.DIS./E.M4/90286/13/DPI DATED 22/03/2014.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 15/09/2010 IN RESPECT OF SR.REGIMOLE JOSEPH.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF GO(RT) NO.3736/2016/G.EDN.

DATED 08/11/2016.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B3/2739/18/K.DIS.

DATED 20/06/2018.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF REVISION PETITION DATED 25/07/2017 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.B3/2013/2020 DATED 01/06/2020.