P.Remya vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 6622 Ker

WP(C) NO. 4735 OF 2022         1



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
    THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                       WP(C) NO. 4735 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          P.RAMYA
          HST PHYSICAL SCIENCE, THARAGAN HIGH SCHOOL,
          ANGADIPURAM, MALAPPURAM - 679 321

          BY ADVS.
          AUGUSTINE JOSEPH
          K.S.ROCKEY
          TONY AUGUSTINE
          GEORGE RENOY



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL
          EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANTHAPURAM- 695 001

    2     THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
          DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM-676 505

    3     THE MANAGER
          THARAGAN HIGH SCHOOL, ANGADIPURAM,
          MALAPPURAM-679 321



          SMT NISHA BOSE, SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 4735 OF 2022                     2




                                        JUDGMENT

The above captioned writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

(i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the 2nd respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner during the period from 2.6.2008 to 31.3.2009 and to pay all consequential benefits within a time limit.

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the revision petition, Ext.P8 within a time limit and affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

2. Sri.Augustine Joseph, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner submits that the order rejecting the proposal for the appointment

cannot be sustained in the light of Ext.P7 judgment rendered by this Court. He

prays that directions be issued to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P8 and

take a decision, expeditiously, within a time frame.

3. I have heard Smt.Nisha Bose, the learned Senior Government

Pleader and have considered the submissions advanced. In the nature of the

order that I propose to pass, notice to the 3rd 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 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.P8, 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

to ensure compliance.

This writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE IAP

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4735/2022

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 2-06-2008

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 15-10-2008

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 13-12-2008

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22-04-2013

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28-05-2019 IN W.P(C) NO.40491/2018

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21-1-2020 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23-11-2021 IN W.P.(C) NO.16453/2020

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 15-1-2022

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

NIL