Veena M.S vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 8637 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

         WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1944

                          WP(C) NO. 21946 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

              VEENA M.S.,
              HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (SOCIAL SCIENCE),
              AMRITA SANSKRIT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PARIPALLY,
              KOLLAM-691 574. RESIDING AT ROCK HOUSE,
              KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT -691578.

              BY ADV S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI

RESPONDENTS:

     1        STATE OF KERALA,
              REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
              GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695008.

     2        DIRECTOR GENERAL OF EDUCATION,
              GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, JAGATHY,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695014.

     3        DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
              GOVT. BHSS CAMPUS, THEVALLY, KOLLAM, PIN-691009.

     4        DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
              KOLLAM, VIDYA NAGAR, KOLLAM, PIN-691013.

     5        MANAGER, AMRITHA SANSKRIT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
              PARIPALLY, KOLLAM-691574.


              SMT.NISHA BOSE, SR GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION        ON
06.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 21946 OF 2022                     2




                                          JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that she is presently working as HST (Social

Science) in the Amritha Sanskrit Higher Secondary School, Paripally. She

contends that she had earlier approached this Court and had filed W.P.(C)

No.8281 of 2022 being aggrieved by the refusal on the part of

respondents in not granting approval of her appointment to the post of

HST (Social Science) and this Court by Ext.P9 judgment had directed the

1st respondent before whom a revision petition had been filed to consider

the same and pass appropriate orders. The said judgment was rendered

on 24.5.2022. The petitioner asserts that the revision petition has not

been heard and disposed of to date. However, pending consideration of

the revision petition, there is every likelihood that there would be a

division fall and reduction of two vacancies and if that happens, the

petitioner may be retrenched. She contends that raising her grievance,

she has preferred Ext.P10 before the DEO which is pending. Seeking

expeditious consideration of Ext.P10 by the DEO, the petitioner is before

this court with this writ petition.

2. The learned Government Pleader points out that the claim

raised by the petitioner that she is the senior most would be crystalized

only after a decision is taken in the revision petition. It is further

submitted that if the limited request is for a consideration of Ext.P10,

there cannot be any impediment.

3. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, notice to

the 5th respondent is dispensed with.

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 at

the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:

a) There will be a direction to the 4th respondent

to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on

Ext.P10, after affording an opportunity of being heard,

either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her

authorised representatives and the 5th respondent.

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed

expeditiously, in any event, within a period of one month

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 sru

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21946/2022

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT LETTER DATED 08.06.2005 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF REJECTION DATED 22/03/2006 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT LETTER ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 05.06.2006 .

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF REJECTION DATED 29.03.2008 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF APPOINTMENT DATED 02.06.2008 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.02.2009 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.07.2017 OF THE HON'BLE DIVISION BENCH IN W.A.NO.2290 OF 2015.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.3124/2021/G.EDN.

DATED 24.06.2021.

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24/5/2022 IN W.P.(C)NO.8281/2022.

Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 1/7/2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL