Disposed

Sr Ancy Joseph v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Jan 2016WP(C)/417/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition regarding employment matters, the Court directed the 1st Respondent to consider pending revisions filed by the Petitioner and the 5th Respondent within three months after affording a hearing opportunity. The Court explicitly reserved its opinion on merits and disposed of the writ petition without deciding them.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 1st Respondent to consider pending revisions and hear both parties within three months; writ petition disposed of without ruling on merits.

Sr Ancy Joseph Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/16TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 417 of 2016 (B)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SR ANCY JOSEPH AGED 42 YEARS AGED 42 YEARS, D/O. JOSEPH UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, ST. JOSEPH'S HIGH SCHOOL P.O. KULATHOOR, VAIPOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

¶9

SRI.V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS

¶12

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

¶13

GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

¶14

THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS

¶15

JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014

¶16

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATIONS PATHANAMTHITTA AT TIRUVALLA 689 101

¶17

THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER TIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 680 101

¶18

THE CORPORATE MANAGER CORPORATE MANAGEMENT OF SCHOOLS ARCHDIOCESE OF CHANGANACHERRY, PASTORAL CENTRE CHANGANACHERRY 686 101, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶19

R1-4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI M A FAYAZ

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WPC NO. 417/2016

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶24

EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DT 4.6.2012

¶25

EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY of the ORDER NO. B5-4616/12 OIF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DT 11.07.2012

¶26

EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY of the ORDER NO.B3/9800/2012/K.DIS. DT 4.2.2014 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

¶27

EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. ET/3/40600/ 14/DPI/K.DIS DT 21.7.2014 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶28

EXT.P5 : TRUE OCPY OF THE REVISION PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT BY THE MANAGER DT 11.9.2014

¶29

EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(P) NO.294/2012/G.EDN. DT 20.9.2012 OF THE GOVERNMENT

¶30

EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 24144/J2/12/G.EDN. DT 3.7.2012 OF THE GOVERMENT

¶31

EXT.P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DT 26.12.2015

¶32

EXT.P9 : TRUE COPY of the RELEVANT PAGE OF THE SSLC BOOK OF THE PETITIONER

¶33

EXT.P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) NO.28/2012/P&ARD DT 20.6.2012 OF THE GOVERNMENT

¶34

EXT.P11 : TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER DT 6.6.12 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT

¶35

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

jma

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J

W.P(C) No. 417 of 2016

¶42

¶43

Dated this the 06^th day of January, 2016

¶44

J U D G M E N T

¶45

The petitioner is aggrieved with the non-consideration of

¶46

Ext.P5 revision filed by the 5^th respondent and P8 revision filed by the petitioner, before the 1^st respondent. The said revisions are dated 11.09.2014 and 26.12.2015 respectively.

¶47

In such circumstance, the 1^st respondent definitely will

¶48

have to look at the revisions filed before it and consider the same in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 5^th respondent, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this

¶49

Court has not made any observations on merits, which the 1^st

¶50

respondent will consider, in accordance with law. Since the subject

¶51

matter is the same, both the revisions can be decided together.

¶52

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶53

SD/(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE)

¶54

jma

¶55

//true copy//

¶56

P.A to Judge

Sr Ancy Joseph v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sr Ancy Joseph v. the 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

Roy Mathew Vs P.P.Benny

P U Sreejith (Minor)Rep by His Father P a Unnikrishnan Vs Smt Lalithakumari

Rahul A.V Vs the District Educational Officer

A.P.Vasanthakumar Vs State of Kerala

P.K.Kharim Vs Kerala State Warehousing

Biju Joseph Vs the State of Kerala