Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BEENA KUMARI.G., LPSA versus ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


BEENA KUMARI.G., LPSA v. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER - WP(C) No. 16919 of 2007(L) [2007] RD-KL 9312 (4 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 16919 of 2007(L)

1. BEENA KUMARI.G., LPSA,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
... Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,

4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

5. THE MANAGER,

For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.THAMBAN

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.16919 OF 2007

Dated this the 4th day of June, 2007



JUDGMENT

Petitioner contends that she was originally appointed as an Upper Primary School Assistant in LMLP School at Nilamel under the management of respondent no.5 in a leave vacancy from January 5, 2000 to March 9, 2000. According to her, the said appointment was approved by the Assistant Educational Officer, Chadayamangalam. Petitioner further contends that she was again appointed in another leave vacancy in the year 2003. The said appointment was not approved. Petitioner has got a further case that she got another appointment in another leave vacancy in the year 2004 and yet again in 2005. The case of the petitioner appears to be that the statutory authorities are not justified in refusing to approve the appointments of the petitioner.

2. I do not propose to deal with any of the above contentions at this stage in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner at the Bar. He submits W.P.(C)No.16919 OF 2007 that petitioner will be satisfied, if an appropriate direction is issued to respondent no.4 to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 revision petition filed by the petitioner in which she is stated to have highlighted the relevant aspects of the issue. Learned Government Pleader submits that an appropriate decision on Ext.P7 will be taken without any delay.

3. In the above facts and circumstances, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.4 to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 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 the petitioner and the manager of the School shall be afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before any decision is taken on Ext.P7. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition and a certified copy of the judgment before respondent no.4 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.