Disposed

Nimisha T.V v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Sept 2021WP(C)/12557/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, a teacher appointed to a school without salary sought a direction from the High Court to direct the Educational Officer to consider and pass an order on a pending representation regarding her appointment. The Court directed the Officer to consider the proposal within three months after hearing the parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the pending application and pass orders within three months after hearing the parties.

Nimisha T.V Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 12557 OF 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 31ST BHADRA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 12557 OF 2021

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

NIMISHA T.V., AGED 31 YEARS, W/O PRAVEEN P.T, SHANTHI (H), P.O.PATHIYARAKKARA, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-671 111.

¶9

BY ADVS. M.R.VENUGOPAL DHANYA P.ASHOKAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION, VADAKARA, VADAKARA H.P.O, KOZHIKODE-673 101.

¶12

2 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MELADI, PAYYOLI SERVICE CO-OP BANK BUILDING, P.O.PAYYOLI, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE-673 522.

¶13

3 THE MANAGER, MELADY MOPLA L.P.SCHOOL, PAYYOLI P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 522.

¶14

BY ADV M.P.SHAMEEM AHAMED

¶15

SRI SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE, GP

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C) NO. 12557 OF 2021

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner states that she was appointed in a promotion vacancy on 06.06.2019 in the Melady Mopla L.P.School, Payyoli as is evident from Ext.P1 order. The petitioner states that the Manager had submitted a proposal and an application before the 2nd respondent for approval of the appointment as is borne out from Ext.P2. The grievance of the petitioner herein is that no action has been taken by the 2nd respondent on Ext.P2 to date. She states that she has been working without salary for the last two years. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is eminently qualified and is entitled to be appointed as LP School teacher. It is in the afore circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs.

¶21

i) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 within a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

¶22

I have heard Smt. Dhanya P.Ashokan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Shameem Ahammed.M.P., the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent and the learned Government Pleader.

¶23

It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the approval

¶24

was not granted due to the incompetence of the 3rd respondent to submit the proposal. However, it is submitted that since Ext.P2 is pending consideration,

¶25

WP(C) NO. 12557 OF 2021

¶26

¶27

appropriate orders can be passed after hearing the parties.

¶28

After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ

¶29

petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by issuing the following directions:

¶30

a) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the assertions made in Ext.P2 representation there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorised representative as well as the 3rd respondent.

¶31

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶32

c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent for further action.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

¶35

IAP

¶36

WP(C) NO. 12557 OF 2021 4

¶37

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12557/2021

¶38

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:

¶39

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 6.6.2019 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 6.6.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO D/41091/2019 DATED 17.7.2019 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶40

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS: NIL

Nimisha T.V v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nimisha T.V 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

Rose Mary Kuruvilla Vs Sri.Mohammed Syed

St.Marys Higher Secondary School Vs State of Kerala

Sreehari K., Vs the Department of General Education

U.v.Anusha Vs a.Shajahan IAS

Sheeja N.V. Vs a.Shajahan, IAS

M.Raveendran Nambiar Vs the State of Kerala