Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PREETHA G.KURUP, W/O RAJESH S. versus DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


PREETHA G.KURUP, W/O RAJESH S. v. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION - WP(C) No. 27876 of 2007(R) [2007] RD-KL 17546 (19 September 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 27876 of 2007(R)

1. PREETHA G.KURUP, W/O RAJESH S.,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
... Respondent

2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR(EDUCATION), OFFICE OF

3. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

4. CORPORATE MANAGER,

For Petitioner :SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND

For Respondent :SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC, TDB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

Dated :19/09/2007

O R D E R

S.SIRI JAGAN,J


================
W.P.(C).No.27876 of 2007
======================

Dated this the 19th day of September 2007



JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by the delay in passing orders regarding approval of appointment order issued to her by the Manager of the school for the period from 15.7.2005 to 5.9.2006 and also the delay in disposing of application for condonation of delay in submitting appointment orders for the period from 6.9.2006 to 5.9.2010 for approval. Regarding approval for the period from 15.7.2005 to 5.9.2006, Exts.P3 and P8 are pending before the third respondent. Regarding condonation of delay in submitting appointment orders for approval for the period from 6.9.2006 to 5.9.2010, the application of the manager is pending before the second respondent. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respective respondent to dispose of the matters pending before him as above.

2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. After hearing both sides, I direct the third respondent to pass final orders on the approval of petitioner's appointment for the period from 15.7.2005 to 5.9.2006 as evidenced by Exts.P3 and W.P.(C).No.27876/2007 P8 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Likewise, the second respondent shall pass orders on Exts.P6 and P7 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. While doing so the respondent 2 and 3 shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the manager. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

dvs


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.