Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C.A.SABU, HSST MATHEMATICS, VIVEKA versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


C.A.SABU, HSST MATHEMATICS, VIVEKA v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE - WP(C) No. 25265 of 2007(G) [2007] RD-KL 16059 (20 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 25265 of 2007(G)

1. C.A.SABU, HSST MATHEMATICS, VIVEKA
... Petitioner

Vs

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

2. DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,

For Petitioner :SRI.BENOY THOMAS

For Respondent : No Appearance

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

Dated :20/08/2007

O R D E R

A.K. BASHEER, J.

W.P.(C). NO. 25265 OF 2007

Dated this the 20th day of August, 2007



J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is stated to be working as Higher Secondary School Teacher (Full Time) (Mathematics) in VCS Higher Secondary School at Puthenvelikkara now. According to him, he was initially appointed as HSST Junior during the academic year 1999-2000. During the next academic year (2000-2001) the said post was upgraded as Full Time. It is contended by the petitioner that he ought to have been promoted to that post. In fact the manager did so, but the Director of Higher Secondary Education has not passed any orders on the proposal for approval sent by the manager in this regard. Exts. P1 and P1(a) are stated to be the order of appointment and proceedings of the manager respectively, which are pending consideration before respondent No.2. It is also submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 representation before respondent No.2 requesting for expeditious action. The limited prayer is to issue an appropriate direction to respondent No.2 to take a decision in the matter without any further delay. WPC NO 25265/07 Page numbers In the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to take a decision on Exts.P1 and P1(a) strictly on their merit and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ext.P3 representation, which is stated to have been filed by the petitioner, shall also be taken up along with Exts. P1 and P1(a) for consideration. Respondent No.2 shall ensure that petitioner and the manager of the school 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 25265/07 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.