Disposed

Aruna.P v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Dec 2020WP(C)/28269/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Counsel for the petitioner prayed for direction to the second respondent to consider her regularization representation. The Court directed the second respondent to dispose of the petitioner's exhibition within two months after affording an opportunity of being heard.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to take up the petitioner's representation and dispose of it within two months, after affording an opportunity of being heard.

Aruna.P Vs the State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.28269 OF 2020(G)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ARUNA.P., AGED 52 YEARS, W/O.KRISHNADAS, PONNETH HOSUE, RAPPAL, PUTHUKKAD, TRICHUR DISTRICT-680 301.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.PRATHEESH.P SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI SMT.S.SEETHA SMT.ANJANA KANNATH

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

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

¶11

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶12

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, 2ND FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, AYANTHOL, THRISSUR-680 003.

¶13

4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR-680 121.

¶14

5 THE MANAGER, LBSM HIGH SCHOOL, AVITTATHUR P.O., IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR-680 121.

¶15

BY SMT. NISHA BOSE - SR.GP

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 28269/20

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 17th day of December 2020

¶21

The petitioner makes a limited plea that the second respondent be directed to take up Exhibit P1 filed by her and consider the same within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is eligible to obtain the benefit of regularisation of her services for the period from 29.11.1990 to 01.06.1999 as duty, as also to all consequential monetary benefits thereof but that it has been illegally denied, thus forcing her to prefer Exhibit P1 representation before the second respondent. She, therefore, prays that said representation be directed to be taken up and disposed of at the earliest.

¶23

In response, the learned Government Pleader submitted that there is no legal impediment in Exhibit P1 representation being taken up and disposed of, but prayed that this Court may not make any affirmative declarations as to the entitlement of the petitioner to any relief and leave it to the competent authority to take a decision on it in terms of law.

¶24

WPC 28269/20 3

¶25

In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition and direct the second respondent to take up Exhibit P1 representation of the petitioner and to dispose of the same, after affording an opportunity of being heard to her – either physically or through video conferencing – thus culminating in an appropriate decision thereon, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶26

Sd/Devan Ramachandran, Judge

tkv

WPC 28269/20

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶32

EXHIBIT P1 THE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 20.01.2020.

¶33

EXHIBIT P2 THE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.DGE/1279/2020-EC5 DATED 03.02.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 THE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24.11.2020 FORWARDED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶34

/TRUE COPY/

¶35

P.S. TO JUDGE

Aruna.P v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aruna.P 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

A.G.Dinesh Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Dr.T.S.Lancelet Vs the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit

P.K. Abdul Majeed Vs Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited

R.S.Anandakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

The Manager Vs the Deputy Director of Education

Babu.K Vs State of Kerala