Disposed

Bengara Jyothi P.R. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Sept 2021WP(C)/16808/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the State Government to expeditiously consider a pending representation regarding the petitioner's appointment as UPST against a promotion vacancy. The Court ordered hearings for the petitioner and the school manager and mandated a decision within three months without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 1st respondent to consider pending representation and pass orders within three months after hearing petitioner and 5th respondent.

Bengara Jyothi P.R. Vs the State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 16808 OF 2021 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶5

TUESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 23RD BHADRA, 1943

¶6

WP(C) NO. 16808 OF 2021

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

BENGARA JYOTHI P.R. AGED 45 YEARS WIFE OF ARUN LAL G.S., G E M S HIGH SCHOOL, POONKODU, CHADAYAMANGALAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691534.

¶9

BY ADVS. V.A.MUHAMMED M.SAJJAD

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶12

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶13

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KOLLAM AT THEVALLY-691009.

¶14

4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691305.

¶15

5 THE MANAGER, G E M S HIGH SCHOOL, POONKODU, CHADAYAMANGALAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691534.

¶16

SMT NISHA BOSE SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶18

14.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C) NO. 16808 OF 2021

¶20

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The petitioner states that she was appointed as UPST in the G.E.M.S High School, Poonkodu under the management of the 5th respondent from 01.06.2010 onwards against a promotion vacancy. However, the proposal for approval was rejected on the ground that the appointment cannot be approved. The petitioner states that her appointment was later approved from 01.06.2011 onwards. She states that as the appointment was made against a promotion vacancy, approval ought to have been granted from 1.6.2010 onwards. She has filed Ext.P10 representation before the 1st respondent which is stated to be pending. It is in the afore circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court seeking directions.

¶23

Sri. V.A. Muhammed, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the limited request of the petitioner is for a direction to the 1st respondent to take up Ext.P10 representation and take a decision with due notice.

¶24

I have heard Smt. Nisha Bose, the learned Senior Government Pleader. In view of the order that I propose to pass, notice to the 5th respondent is dispensed with.

¶25

After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ 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

¶26

WP(C) NO. 16808 OF 2021

¶27

¶28

issuing the following directions:

¶29

a) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the assertions made in Ext.P10 representation there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P10, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorised representative as well as the 5th respondent.

¶30

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.

¶31

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.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

¶36

WP(C) NO. 16808 OF 2021

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16808/2021

¶39

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶40

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 1.6.2010.
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B3/3398/10/DEO DATED 26.4.2011 OF THE DEO, PUNALUR.
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PETITION FILED BY THE MANAGER DATED 10.5.2011 BEFORE THE DDE, KOLLAM.
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B6/8049/2011/K.DIS. DATED 12.3.2012 OF THE DDE, KOLLAM.
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE DDE BY THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF THE ENDT. N.DIS.B6/17924/16 DATED 5.10.2016 OF THE DDE, KOLLAM.
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.2290/2015 DATED 25.7.2017.
Exhibit P8	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.2091/2018 DATED 28.6.2019.
Exhibit P9	TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER NO.60930/J2/11/G.EDN. DATED 25.10.2011.
Exhibit P10	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.7.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT.
Exhibit P11	TRUE COPY OF THE STAFF FIXATION ORDER 2010-2011 DATED 28.2.2011.

¶41

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶42

NIL

Bengara Jyothi P.R. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bengara Jyothi P.R. 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

Princy T. F. Vs State of Kerala

Laxmi Megan Speciality Health Care Private Limited Vs the State of Kerala

The Manager, Vs the State of Kerala

Binu Samuel Vs State of Kerala

Sona C M Vs State of Kerala

M.Shijith Vs Government of Kerala