Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ROSMY KURIACHAN versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


ROSMY KURIACHAN v. STATE OF KERALA - WP(C) No. 23396 of 2007(I) [2007] RD-KL 14602 (31 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 23396 of 2007(I)

1. ROSMY KURIACHAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

2. DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,

3. SECRETARY,

4. PRINCIPAL,

For Petitioner :SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM

For Respondent : No Appearance

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

Dated :31/07/2007

O R D E R

A.K. BASHEER, J.

W.P.(C). NO. 23396 OF 2007

Dated this the 31st day of July, 2007



J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is an Higher Secondary School Teacher (Malayalam). Initially she was appointed as a Higher Secondary School Teacher (Junior).

2. According to the petitioner, she was entitled to be posted as Higher Secondary School Teacher (Senior) with effect from July 15, 1999 in view of the available student strength during that academic year. But in Ext.P2 order, petitioner was given promotion only with effect from July 15, 2000. Petitioner has raised several contentions while challenging the order passed by respondent No.2.

3. Anyhow, I do not propose to deal with those contentions at this stage in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner at the Bar. He submits that petitioner has preferred Ext.P8 representation before respondent No.2 highlighting all the relevant aspects of the issue. The limited prayer is to issue a direction to respondent No.2 to take a decision on Ext.P8 expeditiously. WPC NO.23396/07 Page numbers In the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and pass orders on Ext.P8 strictly on its merit and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Respondent No.2 shall ensure that petitioner and all others who are likely to be affected by the order that may be passed by him, are afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before any decision is taken in the matter. Petitioner shall produce a certified copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before respondent No.2 for compliance.

A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE

vps WPC NO.23396/07 Page numbers

A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE

OP NO.20954/00

JUDGMENT

1ST MARCH, 2007


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.