Sreeja K R vs The Director Of General Education
2021 Latest Caselaw 20164 Ker

WP(C) NO. 19949 OF 2021           1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
    FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 2ND ASWINA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 19949 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

          SREEJA K R
          AGED 41 YEARS
          UPST, M.N.U.P.S, NEDUMPAIKULAM, KOTTARAKKARA,
          KOLLAM - 691501.

          BY ADVS.
          P.NANDAKUMAR
          AMRUTHA SANJEEV



RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
          JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695014,

    2     ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER.
          KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM - 691013.

    3     THE MANAGER,
          M.N.U.P.S NEDUMPAIKULAM, KOTTARAKKARA,
          KOLLAM - 691501.



          SRI BIJOY CHANDRAN, SR GP




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 19949 OF 2021                           2

                                       JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that the approval of appointment of the petitioner as

UPST at the MNUPS, Nedumpaikulam, was rejected by Ext.P1 order. Being

aggrieved, the petitioner is stated to have preferred Ext.P2 revision petition

before the 1st respondent. Being apprehensive of the delay that is likely to be

caused in considering the revision petition, the petitioner is before this Court

seeking the following relief.

(i) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P2 revision petition on merits after hearing the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned

Government Pleader. In view of the limited nature of the relief sought for,

notice to the 3rd 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.P2, as per procedure and in

adherence to the provisions of law, after affording an opportunity of

being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or

her authorised representative and the 3rd 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

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19949/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.C/11956/2021 DATED 25.07.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF REVISION PETITION DATED 26.08.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL