Disposed

Prabha K. Thomas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Nov 2022WP(C)/4986/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition regarding the pending approval of the petitioner's appointment as an HSA teacher. The court directed the First Respondent to consider the revision petition, hear the petitioner, and pass orders within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the 1st respondent to consider the revision petition, hear the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders within three months.

Prabha K. Thomas Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶3

MONDAY, THE 21STDAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 30TH KARTHIKA,1944

¶4

WP(C) NO. 4986 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

PRABHA K. THOMAS
AGED 41 YEARS
W/O. BOBAN P.J., HST ENGLISH,
ST. THOMAS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
MAYANNUR, THRISSUR-679105,
RESIDING AT KAITHAKADAN HOUSE, KODANGODE,
THRISSUR-680584.

¶7

BY ADV U.BALAGANGADHARAN

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT (ANNEX),
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶10

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

¶11

3THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (D.D.E.),
THRISSUR-680003, AYYANTHOL.

¶12

4THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER (D.E.O.),
CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680506.
5CORPORATE MANAGER,
CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY,
BISHOP HOUSE, THRISSUR-680020.
SMT NISHA BOSE SR GP

¶13

THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFOR
ADMISSIONON21.11.2022,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C) NO. 4986 OF 2022

¶15

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner states that she was appointed as HSA (English) in the St. Sebastian H.S. Mannamangalam on 03.06.2008 against a vacancy that arose due to transfer. Though directions were issued by the DGE to approve the appointment, orders of approval have not been issued. It is in the afore circumstances that this writ petition is filed seeking issuance of directions to the 4th respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner with all consequential benefits.

¶18

Sri. U. Balagangadharan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that stating all relevant aspects and narrating her grievances, the petitioner has preferred Exhibit P10 revision petition before the 1st respondent and requests that directions be issued to the 1st respondent to consider the same, within a time frame, with due notice.

¶19

I have heard the learned Government Pleader as well. In view

¶20

of the order that I propose to pass, no prejudice would be caused to the 5th respondent if notice is dispensed with.

¶21

4. After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this

¶22

writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar, and the facts and

¶23

WP(C) NO. 4986 OF 2022

¶24

¶25

circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:

¶26

a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P10, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorized representative and the 5th respondent Manager.

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

¶32

avs

¶33

WP(C) NO. 4986 OF 2022

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4986/2022

¶36

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶37

`Exhibit`	`P1` `A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED BY` `THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED` `3.6.2008 CARRYING ENDORSEMENT OF THE DEO DATED` `25.2.2010.`
`Exhibit`	`P2` `A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH` `RESPONDENT DATED 8.3.2018.`
`Exhibit`	`P3` `A TRUE COPY OF THE REVERSION ORDER ISSUED BY THE` `5TH RESPONDENT DATED 21.6.2016.`
`Exhibit`	`P4` `A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7.10.2020 OF THE` `1ST RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P5` `A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH` `RESPONDENT DATED 18.9.2021.`
`Exhibit`	`P6` `A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED BY` `THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 11.8.2017.`
`Exhibit`	`P7` `A TRUE COPY OF THE REVERSION ORDER DATED` `13.6.2018 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P8` `A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED BY` `THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 26.6.2019.`
`Exhibit`	`P9` `A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 8.4.2021 OF THE` `2ND RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P10` `A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED` `31.1.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE` `FIRST RESPONDENT.`

Prabha K. Thomas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabha K. Thomas 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

Sherin Francis C. Vs State of Kerala

Shemeema Pookkot, Vs the State of Kerala

All Petroleum Products Transporters Association Vs the Chairman Cum-Managing Director

Adeel.M., Vs the State of Kerala

Assumption Public School Vs State of Kerala

Justin O K Vs the State of Kerala