Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

P.REGHUNANDANAN, REVATHY versus DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


P.REGHUNANDANAN, REVATHY v. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION - WP(C) No. 17000 of 2007(W) [2007] RD-KL 9486 (5 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 17000 of 2007(W)

1. P.REGHUNANDANAN, REVATHY,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
... Respondent

2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE

3. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, KERALA,

4. PRINCIPAL, M.S.M. COLLEGE,

For Petitioner :SRI.K.SASIKUMAR

For Respondent : No Appearance

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

Dated :05/06/2007

O R D E R

A.K.BASHEER, J.

W.P.(C)No.17000 OF 2007

Dated this the 5th day of June, 2007



JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a retired professor. His grievance is that the short spells of service rendered by him from April 1, 1969 to March 31, 1970 as well as from September 1, 1972 to March 31, 1973 are not being taken into account while fixing his service benefits, on the ground that the acquittance roll and other relevant records relating to the above periods had been lost after they were produced in a court. It appears that Government had tried to salvage the situation and issued Ext.P1 order. Thereafter, Ext.P2 certificate was issued which indicated that petitioner had in fact worked in the college during the periods mentioned above.

2. Anyhow, I do not propose to deal with 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 that the petitioner has highlighted his grievance in Ext.P3 representation submitted by him before respondent no.1. The limited prayer is to issue a direction to respondent no.1 to take a decision on W.P.(C)No.17000 OF 2007 Ext.P3 expeditiously. Learned Government Pleader submits that an appropriate decision would be taken on Ext.P3 without any further 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.P3 strictly on its 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. While taking a decision on Ext.P3, respondent no.1 shall keep in view Ext.P1 order issued by Government and also the certificate issued by the head of the institution. Needless to mention that the petitioner shall be afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before any decision is taken on Ext.P3. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition and 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.