Kerala High Court
Navya P.K vs State Of Kerala on 13 August, 2025
Author: T.R.Ravi
Bench: T.R.Ravi
W.P.(C) Nos.16740 of 2022
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 22ND SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 16740 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
PREETHA V.R.,
AGED 48 YEARS
WIFE OF MOHANAN, HSA (ENGLISH),
MTTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT- 670 702.
BY ADVS.
SRI V.A.MUHAMMED
SRI M.SAJJAD
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT ANNEXE-11,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
HIGHER SECONDARY WING, SANTHI NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.
3 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
EDUCATION, KANNUR- 670 002.
4 THE MANAGER,
MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 002.
5 THE PRINCIPAL,
MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 002.
W.P.(C) Nos.16740 of 2022
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
2
BY ADVS
SRI POOVAMULLE PARAMBIL ABDULKAREEM
SRI.VENUGOPAL, GOVT. PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
13.8.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).20223/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) Nos.16740 of 2022
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 22ND SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 20223 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
NAVYA P.K,
AGED 32 YEARS
D/O. CHANDRABHANU.P.M, HSST (ENGLISH)
MATTANUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
MATTANUR, KANNUR- 670002
BY ADV SRI T.R.RAJESH
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATIONAL DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA.,
PIN - 695001
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
HIGHER SECONDARY WING, SANTHI NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001
3 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER
SECONDARY EDUCATION , KANNUR, PAYYAMBALAM,
KERALA - 670003
4 THE MANAGER,
MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR,
KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA - 670002
5 THE PRINCIPAL,
MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR,KANNUR
W.P.(C) Nos.16740 of 2022
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
4
DISTRICT, KERALA - 670002
6 SMT.PREETHA.V.R,
AGED 49 YEARS, W/O. MOHANAN, H.S.A (ENGLISH),
MATTANNUR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MATTANNUR,KANNUR
DISTRICT, KERALA - 670002
BY ADVS.
SRI.VENUGOPAL, GOVT.PLEADER
SRI POOVAMULLE PARAMBIL ABDUL KAREEM- R4 & R5
SRI K.N.KUMARASWAMY SARMA-R4 & R5
SRI M.SAJJAD-R6
SRI V.A MUHAMMED-R6
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
13.8.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).16740/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) Nos.16740 of 2022
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
5
T.R.RAVI,J.
-----------------------------------
W.P.(C) Nos.16740 of 2022 & 20223 of 2023
-----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of August, 2025
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri V.A.Muhammed, counsel for the petitioner in W.P.
(C)No.16740 of 2023 and for the 6th respondent in W.P.(C)No.20223
of 2023, Sri T.R. Rajesh for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.20223 of 2023,
Sri Poovamulle Parambil Abdul Kareem for respondents 4 and 5 in W.P.
(C)No.16740 of 2022 and for respondents 3 and 4 in W.P.(C)No.20223
of 2023, Sri Venugopal, Government Pleader for official
respondents/State.
2. The petitioner was appointed as a UPSA in the 4th
respondent School with effect from 19.08.1996. She was promoted
as HSA (English) with effect from 02.06.2008. She is a Post Graduate
in English with more than 50% marks, B.Ed. in English, and is also
SET qualified, which makes her eligible for appointment to the post of
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
HSST (English).
3. Chapter 32 of the Kerala Education Rules (hereinafter
referred to as 'KER') deals with the appointment of Teachers in the
Higher Secondary Section. As per Rule 3 of Chapter 32 KER, the
HSST and HSST Junior posts are categorised as categories 2 and 3,
respectively. The method of appointment is dealt with in Rule 4. An
HSST is to be appointed by transfer from among the Junior Lecturers
in the subject concerned under the management/HSST Junior. In the
absence of qualified hands in the above category, the vacancy is to be
filled up by "by transfer" appointment and direct appointment in the
ratio of 1:3. By transfer appointment is to be from among High
School Assistants who possess the requisite qualifications under the
educational agency and in the absence of High School Assistants,
from among qualified UPSA/LPSA who possesses the requisite
qualification in the subject concerned under the educational agency.
The note to Serial No.2 in the table in Rule 4 says that when qualified
persons are not available to fill up the vacancies set apart for
appointment by transfer from among High School Assistants/
UPSA/LPSA, such vacancies are also to be allotted for direct
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
recruitment.
4. A retirement vacancy of HSST English occurred in the
school on 01.06.2020. No HSST Junior English was available for
promotion. The petitioner contends that the vacancy was to be filled
up by a "by transfer" appointment of a qualified HSA. A second
vacancy of HSST English occurred on 01.06.2021. Due to the ban on
appointments owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, no appointments
were made towards the above-mentioned vacancies at the time when
the vacancies arose. The seniormost HSA English who was eligible to
be appointed by transfer as HSST English was appointed as HSST
English in 2021, towards the vacancy which arose on 01.06.2020.
However, instead of filling up the vacancy that arose on 01.06.2021
consequent to the retirement of Smt.K.Jaya, HSST English, the
Manager notified the post for direct appointment, by treating both the
vacancies as having arisen in 2021. The petitioner contends that the
two vacancies could not have been clubbed together as vacancies that
arose in 2021.
5. The petitioner submitted Ext.P1 representation before the
3rd respondent, claiming appointment to the vacancy that arose in
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
2021. The request was rejected stating that as per Circular
No.3257/2021 dated 06.07.2021, the Director has directed to effect
appointment against existing vacancies only on 15.07.2021, treating
the same as one single unit, and hence, only one vacancy can be filled
up under the transfer method and the next vacancy will have to be
filled up by direct recruitment. The petitioner preferred Ext.P3
revision before the Government, which has been rejected as per
Ext.P4 order dated 07.04.2022. Ext.P4 order has been challenged in
this writ petition.
6. The petitioner has produced a letter dated 09.04.2019
(Ext.P5) whereby the Government had informed the Director that the
ratio of 1:3 must be applied based on the number of vacancies and
not based on the cadre strength. The reasoning in Ext.P4 is that,
even though the vacancies in the particular year has to be taken into
account for applying the ratio of 1:3, in view of the direction not to fill
up the vacancies which occurred in 2020-2021, the 2 vacancies will
have to be treated as vacancies existing on 15.07.2021 and the ratio
of 1:3 will have to be applied on the said vacancies. The order refers
to a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Girija V. Reshma
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
Parayil & Ors. [(2019) 2 SCC 347], which had been rendered by
interpreting Rule 4 of Chapter XXXII KER. The petitioner contends that
if the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is followed, the
conclusion drawn in Ext.P4 could not have been made.
7. In Girija (supra), the question that the Hon'ble Supreme
Court considered was whether the post of HSST (Economics), newly
sanctioned in the school in the year 2012-13 was required to be filled
up by direct recruitment taking the cadre strength of the HSST or the
same was required to be filled up by transfer. Paragraphs 14 to 16 of
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Girija (supra) are
extracted below:
"14. We may now first look into the statutory Scheme as
delineated by Rule 4 of Kerala Education Rules. The first issue
is as to whether for filling up the post of Higher Secondary
School Teacher, the vacancy has to be allocated as per the
cadre strength. A perusal of the Rule 4(2) contemplates that
post of Higher Secondary School Teacher is to be filled up first
"by transfer from Junior Lecturer in the subject concerned
under the management / Higher Secondary School Teacher
(Junior)". Thus, every vacancy of Higher Secondary School
Teacher has to be filled up first by the transfer of Higher
Secondary School Teacher (Junior) in the subject concerned.
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
There is a purpose and object for providing a particular
Scheme for filling up the post of Higher Secondary School
Teacher. Higher Secondary School Teacher (Junior) is also
lecturer in concerned subject and the Statute required that
whenever post in Higher Secondary School Teacher arises, the
same shall be first offered to the Junior Lecturer in the subject.
Above statutory Scheme serves the interests of the School,
students and the teachers already serving in the institution. A
Junior Lecturer working in the same subject is first choice to fill
up the post, which obviates the management to take any other
steps for recruitment. The second method of recruitment under
Rule 4(2) begins with the word "in the absence of qualified
hands under clause (1) above". Thus, recruitment under Clause
(2) shall be resorted only when no qualified hands under
clause (1), i.e. Junior Lecturer in the concerned subject is not
available. Further, the second phrase of Rule 4(2) begins with
the word "the vacancies shall be apportioned in the ratio 1:3
between appointment by transfer and direct recruitment". The
clear intendment is that vacancy arising in Higher Secondary
School Teacher has to be apportioned in ratio of 1:3. There is
no concept of looking to the cadre of the post of Higher
Secondary School Teacher while apportioning the vacancy
under Rule 4(2), the cadre strength is not to be looked into in
view of the method of recruitment provided under Rule 4(2),
i.e. of vacancies of Higher Secondary School Teacher is filled
up first by transfer of Junior Lecturer.
15. A plain reading of the above Statutory Provision clearly
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
indicates that for apportioning the vacancy, the cadre strength
of the Higher Secondary School Teacher is not to be looked
into to find out as to which vacancy will go to transfer or direct
recruitment. Now coming to the facts of the present case, in
the year 2012-2013, two new posts were created in Higher
Secondary School Teacher, i.e. Commerce and Economics, both
were the new vacancies and no Junior Lecturers, i.e. Higher
Secondary School Teacher (Junior) qualified in the subject
being available, Rule 4(2) has to be resorted to. The ratio
mentioned is 1:3, which means that first vacancy is to be filled
up by transfer. Resorting to cadre strength, thus, was not
contemplated by plain reading of Rule 4(2). We, thus, do not
find any substance in the submission of the counsel for the
appellant.
16. Above interpretation of Rule 4(2) is reinforced by looking
to Rule 4(3), which deals with recruitment of Higher Secondary
School Teacher (Junior). Higher Secondary School
Teacher(Junior) is also to be filled up by transfer from qualified
High School Assistant in the subjects concerned. In absence of
qualified hands, by transfer from qualified Upper Primary
School Assistants/ Lower Primary School Assistants in the
subjects concerned under the Educational Agency. For filling up
the posts in the subjects concerned, the direct recruitment is
also provided as one mode of recruitment. Note 1, which is
very relevant, provides "25% of the total posts shall be filled
up by the method specified in item (I) above on seniority-cum-
suitability basis and 75% of such post shall be filled up by
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
direct appointment". Here, Note 1, uses two expressions "total
posts" and "such posts". Thus, computation of 25% and 75% is
to be based on that total posts of Higher Secondary School
Teacher (Junior). The language used in Note 1 when read in
contradiction to Rule 4(2)(ii), the intention is clear that
whereas for appointment in Higher Secondary School Teacher,
the vacancy shall be apportioned, whereas for filling up the
post of Higher Secondary School Teacher (Junior), "total posts"
are to be apportioned on the basis of cadre strength."
8. The judgment in Girija (supra) was followed by this Court
in Ext.P7 judgment in WP(C) No.7009/2021. There is no dispute
regarding the above legal position. However, in Ext.P4, a distinction is
drawn, since, as per G.O.(MS) No.28/2021/G.Edn. dated 21.02.2021,
the Government had ordered that the staff fixation order for the year
2019-2020 is to be followed for the year 2020-2021 also. The said
staff fixation was also followed during 2021-2022. The question,
therefore, is whether the staff fixation order and the fact that the
appointment was permitted only to be made from 15.07.2021 could
have the effect of postponing the dates of occurrence of the vacancy
from 01.06.2020 and 01.06.2021 to a later date.
9. It is contended that the right to be considered for
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
appointment is to be decided based on the date on which the vacancy
arose. [See Varghese & Ors. V. State of Kerala & Ors. [1981
KLT 458 (F.B.)] and Padmanabhan Nair V. Deputy Director
[1991 (1) KLT 337 (F.B.)]. The decision in Manju v. State of
Kerala [ILR 2005 (1) Kerala 410] (Ext.P.10), is relied on to submit
that in cases where vacancy occurs immediately on the vacation of an
office of an incumbent who superannuates on the closing date, the
statutory interdiction not to fill up the vacancy till the re-opening
date, does not envisage the postponement of the date of occurrence
of a vacancy. It is submitted that the date of occurrence of vacancy
and the date of appointment are two different aspects, and the mere
fact that appointments were permitted by the Government with effect
from 15.07.2021 would not shift the date of occurrence of vacancy to
that date, and that there is hence no necessity that the two dates
should coincide. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of this Court
in Manager Evans School, Parassala & Anr. v. P.J. Usha Kumari
[2011 (2) KLT 768] wherein reference was made to the judgment of
a Full Bench of this Court in Manager MDPS UP School v. Paulose
E.A. [2010 (2) KLT 29 (FB). The petitioner also relies on G.O.
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
(Rt.)No.5157/2023/G.Edn. dated 5.9.2023 and G.O.(Rt.)No.
6138/2023/G.Edn. dated 14.10.2023, wherein the Government had
made it clear that the ratio of 1:3 for appointments to the post of
HSST must be applied based on the occurrence of the vacancy and
not when the appointment was effected. It is pointed out that the
vacancies in those cases were also those that occurred in different
years, but the appointments were made simultaneously due to the
COVID-19 pandemic.
10. The educational authorities have filed a counter affidavit in
tune with Ext.P4. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit
wherein it is stated that, as instructed by the official respondents, the
first vacancy had been earmarked for appointment by transfer, and
the second vacancy was earmarked for appointment by direct
recruitment. It is submitted that Smt.Navya P.K., who is the
petitioner in W.P.(C)No.20223 of 2023, was selected in an interview
conducted by the Selection Committee and appointed to the vacancy
to be filled up by direct recruitment. It is stated that she has been
working as an HSST from 1.6.2022 without any pay and allowances
since the appointment is yet to be approved.
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
11. The 4th respondent has placed reliance on the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Himachal Pradesh &
Ors. v. Rajkumar & Ors. [2022 (3) KLJ 604] to submit that the
right to be considered for appointment must be based on the Rule in
force as on the date on which the consideration takes place, and if the
Government takes a conscious policy decision not to fill up the
vacancies, the said policy decision cannot be ignored. Reliance is also
placed on the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in
W.A.No.2609 of 2015 [Ext.R4(e)] and the judgment in Manager,
Iqbal Higher Secondary School & Anr. v. Saritha P.V. & Ors.
[2019 (4) KHC 391]. The said decision is to the effect that the
vacancy position should be after excluding the post of Junior
Lecturer/HSST (Jr.). In Manager, Iqbal Higher Secondary School
(supra), the Division Bench held that the ratio applicable to HSA and
direct recruitment will have application only when an appointment is
made and an HSST(Junior) is not available. It can be seen from the
facts on which the above judgment is rendered that 15 appointments
were made in the Higher Secondary School, 11 HSSTs were promoted
from the post of HSST (Jr.), three appointments were made from the
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
cadre of HSA to the post of HSST and the 4 th vacancy as per the ratio
of 1:3 was to be conceded for direct recruitment.
12. A reading of the judgment would show that the court had
considered the appointments made in previous years to apply the
ratio of 1:3 to the vacancies that arose. The Court held that
vacancies which were filled up from HSST (Jr.) will have no relevance,
and it would apply only to vacancies which were filled up in the
absence of HSST (Jr.). The 4th respondent has produced Ext.R4(g),
which shows the details of appointments made from 2000 onwards in
the school in the HSST Section. Out of 17 appointments made in the
post of HSST, six were "by transfer" appointments and 11 were direct
recruitments. However, it is not clear from Ext.R4(g) as to whether
the appointments by transfer made to six of the vacancies are from
among the HSAs or HSSTs (Jr.). As such, the contention of the 4 th
respondent that the 18th vacancy has to be filled up by direct
recruitment cannot be decided based on the available facts.
13. On a reading of the judgments in Girija (supra) and
Manager, Iqbal Higher Secondary School (supra), the question
of clubbing of the vacancies of 2020 and 2021 has no relevance. The
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
application of the ratio cannot be on an year to year basis, in which
case, the rule itself would not be capable of being given effect to. If
there were no HSST (Junior) available when the vacancies arose, then
necessarily the apportionment of the vacancies between the by
transfer appointment and direct appointment would come into play.
The method laid down in Manager, Iqbal Higher Secondary
School (supra) will then have to be followed, after ascertaining the
vacancies that arose in the previous years which were not filled up by
appointment of HSST(Junior). That is to say, the vacancies filled up by
appointment of HSST(Junior) are to be deducted from the total
vacancies, and the ratio has to be applied to the resultant figure. It is
seen that neither Ext.P2 nor Ext.P4 has considered the issue from the
correct legal position and has proceeded based on the clubbing
together of vacancies of the two years and applying the ratio.
14. In the result, W.P.(C)No. 16740 of 2022 is allowed in part.
Exts.P2 and P4 are set aside. The 3 rd respondent is directed to
reconsider the issue based on the law stated above, call for the details
regarding the appointments made in the previous years, and pass
fresh orders after hearing the petitioner, the 4 th respondent, and the
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
petitioner in W.P.(C)No.20223 of 2023, at the earliest, at any rate
within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
15. The petitioner in this case is the person appointed to the
post of HSST (English) by direct appointment, in the 4 th respondent
school. The prayer is for a declaration that her appointment is in
accordance with law and for directions to pass orders on Ext.P7
representation for approval of appointment and payment of salary. In
the light of the directions issued in W.P.(C)No. 16740 of 2022, this
writ petition is disposed of directing the 3 rd respondent to pass
consequential orders on Ext.P7 representation, within two weeks from
passing orders as directed in W.P.(C)No.16740 of 2022.
Sd/-
T. R. RAVI
JUDGE
dsn/pn
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16740/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE PETITIONER
ADDRESSING THE RDD HSE, KANNUR DATED
30.07.2021.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE RDD HSE,
KANNUR ADDRESSING THE PETITIONER DATED
23.09.2021 FOR REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
GOVERNMENT DATED 25.09.2021.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.
2308/2022/G.EDN. DATED 07.04.2022.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER NO.
G.EDN-SCI/8/2019-G.EDN. DATED 09.04.2019.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO. 28/20-
21/G.EDN. DATED 22.01.2021.
Exhibit P-7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
HONOURABLE COURT IN WP(C) NO. 7009/2021
DATED 30.06.2022
Exhibit P-8 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2005
(1) KLT SN 98
Exhibit P-9 TRUE COPY OF DECISION REPORTED IN 1981 KHC
148 DATED 03.06.1981 IN VARGHESE AND OTHERS
V. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS
Exhibit P-10 TRUE COPY OF DECISION REPORTED IN 2005 KHC
289 DATED 04.01.2005 IN MANJU V. STATE OF
KERALA
Exhibit P-11 TRUE COPY OF G.O(RT) NO. 5157/2023/G.EDN
DATED 15.09.2023
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
23/9/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit R4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT)
NO.3287/2021/G.EDN, DATED 6/7/2021 ISSUED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit R4(c) TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(RT) NO.2412/2022/GEDN
DATED 13/4/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
Exhibit R4(d) TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2022
(3) KLJ 604
Exhibit R4(e) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19/01/2016
IN W.A.NO.2609/2015 ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE
COURT
Exhibit R4(f) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORTED DECISION 2019 (4)
KHC 391 (DB), IN MANAGER, IQBAL HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL AND ANOTHER VS. SARITHA P
V AND OTHERS
Exhibit R4(g) TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF APPOINTMENTS
FROM 2000 MADE IN THE SCHOOL BY THIS
RESPONDENT
& 20223 of 2023
2025:KER:60714
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20223/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SELECTION
COMMITTEE DATED 23.04.2022 PUBLISHING THE
SELECT LIST CONTAINING THE NAME OF THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF GO(MS)NO.28/2021/GEDN DATED
22.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF GO(RT) NO.3287/2021/GEDN DATED
06.07.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE NO.B3/4870/2021
DATED 23.09.2021
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF G.O(RT)NO.2308/2022/GEDN DATED
07.04.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY
THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 24.05.2022 IN
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED
BY THE APPLICANT BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 05.06.2022
