Disposed

K.S.Remadevi v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Dec 2012WP(C)/29918/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the First Respondent to consider the petitioner's revision petition with a hearing for all parties within three months and the Second Respondent to consider a facility request within six weeks, while keeping recovery proceedings in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondents 1 and 2 to consider pending petitions and case files with hearing within specified time periods while recovery of dues is stayed.

K.S.Remadevi Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/23RD AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 29918 of 2012 (L)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

K.S.REMADEVI, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT(U.P.S.A), K.T.M.HIGH SCHOOL,MANNARKKAD.P.O,PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶11

2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,PALAKKAD,PIN-678 001.

¶12

3. THE MANAGER,

¶13

K.T.M.HIGH SCHOOL,MANNARKKAD.P.O,PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678 582.

¶14

4. SMT.P.M.NALINI, H S A(SS)(HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT-SOCIAL STUDIES), K.T.M.HIGH SCHOOL,MANNARKKAD.P.O,PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678 582.

¶15

R1 & R2 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.T.LILLY

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

sts

¶18

WP(C)NO.29918/2012

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶21

EXT-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF STATEMENT AS ON 1.4.2011 OF K.T.M, HIGH SCHOOL,MANNARKKAD.

¶22

EXT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1/2967/11/DIS DATED 12.4.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶23

EXT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 27.5.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT

¶24

EXT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1/1486/12 DATED 20.9.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶25

EXT-P5 TRUE COPY LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE HEADMASTER, K.T.M.H.S, MANNARKKAD BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶26

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶31

¶32

W.P.(c) No. 29918 of 2012

¶33

¶34

Dated this the 14^th day of December , 2012

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

The petitioner, who was working as UPSA in the third respondent school, came to be retrenched so as to accommodate the fourth respondent, which in turn is under challenge by way of Ext.P3 revision petition filed by the petitioner before the first respondent. While so, the fourth respondent came to be promoted as H.S.A.(Social Sciene) as per Ext.P4 and in the said circumstance, the Headmaster filed Ext.P5 before the second respondent, DEO, who is now at the helm of the affairs of the school, for accommodating the petitioner in that vacancy. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the only relief sought for is to cause the above matter to be considered and disposed of within a reasonable time.

¶37

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

¶38

Considering the limited nature of relief sought for, this

¶39

Court does not find it necessary to issue notice to the third and fourth

¶40

W.P.(C)No.29918/2012 2

¶41

respondents for the time being. The writ petition is disposed of, directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P3 and pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the third and fourth respondents at the earliest, at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The second respondent is directed to consider Ext.P5 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, at the earliest at any rate within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that any steps for recovery of the amounts stated as due from the petitioner vide Ext.P2 shall be kept in abeyance till final orders are passed in the proceedings as aforesaid.

¶42

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the respondents 1 and 2 for further steps.

¶43

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶44

sv.

¶45

W.P.(C)No.29918/2012 2

¶46

W.P.(C)No.29918/2012 2

K.S.Remadevi v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.S.Remadevi v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P. Kunjiraman Vs Director of Public Instructions

Jimmy David Chakiath Vs Secretary, Ministry of Defence

Jyothirmayi P.V. Vs State of Kerala

Neena Mathai Vs the Corporate Educational Agency

K. Chandran Vs Alappuzha Municipality

Malini.v.K. Vs State of Kerala and Others