Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ASHALATHA.V.R., AGED 55 YEARS versus THE STATE OF KERALA, REPTD. BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


ASHALATHA.V.R., AGED 55 YEARS v. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPTD. BY - WP(C) No. 16907 of 2007(K) [2007] RD-KL 9306 (4 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 16907 of 2007(K)

1. ASHALATHA.V.R., AGED 55 YEARS,
... Petitioner

Vs

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

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,

3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER,

For Petitioner :SRI.ESM.KABEER

For Respondent : No Appearance

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

Dated :04/06/2007

O R D E R

A.K.BASHEER, J.

W.P.(C)No.16907 OF 2007

Dated this the 4th day of June, 2007



JUDGMENT

Petitioner retired from service as Principal of N.S.S. Higher Secondary School, Kidangoor on May 31, 2007. According to her, she had worked as High School Assistant in V.H.S.S. Vandemathirem at Veliyannoor from July 8, 1977 to June 18, 1980 for a period of 2 years and 11 months and 11 days. She worked as Upper Primary School Assistant in N.S.S. Higher Secondary School, Kidangoor from January 1, 1982 to March 12, 1982 for period of 2 months and 12 days. Thereafter, she commenced her continuous service as Upper Primary School Assistant in N.S.S.Higher Secondary School, Kidangoor from July 27, 1982. She continued in service till the date of her retirement. Petitioner's grievance is that the period of break in her service is liable to be condoned by the Government in view of Ext.P3 order.

2. I do not propose to deal with the above contention in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner at the Bar. He submits that petitioner has preferred W.P.(C)No.16907 OF 2007 Ext.P5 representation highlighting all the relevant aspects before the Government. The limited prayer is to issue an appropriate direction to take a decision on Ext.P5 without any delay. Learned Government Pleader submits that if Ext.P5 is pending consideration, an appropriate decision thereon will be taken without any delay.

3. In the above facts and circumstances, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 strictly on its merit and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to mention that respondent no.1 shall ensure that petitioner is afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before any decision is taken. Petitioner shall produce a certified copy of the judgment before respondent no.1 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.