Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THARA CHANDRAN, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


THARA CHANDRAN, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL- v. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE - WP(C) No. 23033 of 2006(P) [2007] RD-KL 14515 (30 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 23033 of 2006(P)

1. THARA CHANDRAN, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL-
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

3. THE HEADMISTRESS, NSS HIGH SCHOOL,

For Petitioner :SRI.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER

Dated :30/07/2007

O R D E R

A.K.BASHEER, J.

W.P.(C)No.23033 OF 2006

Dated this the 30th day of July, 2007



JUDGMENT

Petitioner had availed of leave without allowance from April 3, 2006 to November 30, 2000 to pursue her study for B.Ed. Course. Leave was sanctioned and thereafter on completion of her studies, she had rejoined duty and she was given her service benefits reckoning the period of leave without allowance as eligible leave for all such benefits. However, in Ext.P5 respondent no.1 has turned down the request of the petitioner to reckon the period for increment, higher grade, pension, etc. Learned counsel submits that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the petitioner in view of the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C)No.26782/05 as well as in Deepika v. State of Kerala [2007 (1) KLT 71]. The grievance of the petitioner is that the impugned order has been issued without adverting to the dictum laid down by this court in the above two judgments. W.P.(C)No.23033 OF 2006

2. In the above facts and circumstances, Exts.P4 and P5 are quashed to the extent they deny the above benefits to the petitioner. The 1st respondent shall reconsider matter in the light of the two judgments referred to above and strictly on its merit. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to be heard. Petitioner shall produce a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above.

A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE

jes


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.