Disposed

Princy T. F. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Sept 2021WP(C)/18444/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition filed by a Sanskrit teacher aggrieved by non-approval of her appointment, directing the respondent to expedite the pending revision within three months after affording a hearing opportunity. Order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner and 6th respondent to be heard regarding Ext.P10 revision; first respondent directed to consider it within three months as expeditiously as possible. The Writ Petition is disposed of.

Princy T. F. Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 9^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 18TH BHADRA, 1943

¶4

WP(C) NO. 18444 OF 2021

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

1 PRINCY T. F. AGED 33 YEARS W/O. SHIJO K. V., WORKING AS JR. SANSKRIT (FT) TEACHER, ST. XAVIER'S UP SCHOOL, VELUR, THRISSUR - 680 581, RESIDING AT KANNANAIKKAL HOUSE, KAIPARAMBU, THRISSUR - 680 546.

¶7

BY ADVS. U.BALAGANGADHARAN S.ANJUSHA

¶8

RESPONDENT:

¶9

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

¶10

2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, (FORMER DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶11

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (D.D.E.) SECOND FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOL, THRISSUR - 680 003.

¶12

4 ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, (A.E.O.) CHERPU, THRISSUR - 680561.

¶13

5 ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR - 680 503.

¶14

6 CORPORATE MANAGER, CORPORATE EDUCATION AGENCY, ARCH DIOCESE,

¶15

WPC NO.18444 of 2021

¶16

¶17

THRISSUR - 680 020.

¶18

BY ADV. NISHA BOSE, GP

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC NO.18444 of 2021

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 09^th day of September, 2021

¶24

The petitioner, who is a Junior Sanskrit Teacher appointed against a substantive vacancy, is aggrieved by the non approval of her appointment since the date of appointment. An appeal was filed which was dismissed, consequent to which Ext.P10 revision was filed. It was pending consideration before the first respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after considerable delay the above application has not been considered.

¶25

After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I feel that the Writ Petition itself can be disposed of at the threshold, without issuing notice to the remaining respondents. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to take up and consider Ext.P10 revision, after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the 6^th respondent Corporate Education Agency, either personally or online,

¶26

WPC NO.18444 of 2021

¶27

¶28

as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period

¶29

of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

¶30

judgment.

¶31

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

SKP/9-9

WPC NO.18444 of 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18444/2021

¶39

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶40

EXHIBIT	P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 12.07.2013.
EXHIBIT	P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 02.06.2014.
EXHIBIT	P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER CARRYING THE ENDORSEMENT OF APPROVAL GRANTED TO SMT. DHANYA DATED 03.06.2013.
EXHIBIT	P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2018 IN W.P.(C) NO.24251 OF 2018 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
EXHIBIT	P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.01.2019 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 14.10.2015 OF THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY TO 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 05.03.2018 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.11.2020 IN WP(C) NO.22731 OF 2020 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
EXHIBIT	P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 01.07.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT	P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 01.09.2021 OF THE PETITIONER.

¶41

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶42

TRUE COPY

¶43

P.A. TO JUDGE

Princy T. F. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Princy T. F. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

The Manager, Vs the State of Kerala

Betty Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Bengara Jyothi P.R. Vs the State of Kerala

Binu Samuel Vs State of Kerala

Sona C M Vs State of Kerala