IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 33684 of 2008(I)
1. RADHIKA.P.T, W/O.T.K.JAYAKRISHNAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
... Respondent
2. THE HEADMISTRESS, GHSS ERUMAPPETTI,
3. HENCY LOUISE, HSA(MATHS),GHS PEECHI,
For Petitioner :SRI.C.A.CHACKO
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :03/12/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------
W.P.(C) No.33684 OF 2008
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2008
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner submits that she is an HSA in GHSS,
Erumappetti, Thrissur. According to her, by submitting
Ext.P3 application she sought transfer to a school near to
Peechi. Since there was no consideration of her request,
she made Ext.P4 representation to the 1st respondent.
Neither on Ext.P3, nor on Ext.P4 was there any response.
While so, the 3rd respondent was posted at Peechi as per
Ext.P5. The petitioner complains that the posting of the 3rd
respondent by Ext.P5 is ignoring her superior claims.
2. As already noticed, the claim of the petitioner is
for transfer to one of the schools in Peechi, and according to
the petitioner, the claim made by Exts.P3 and P4 has not
been considered. Complaint being the above, I direct the 1st
respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P3 and P4,
provided these are still pending without orders, within eight
WP(C) No.33684/2008
-2-
weeks of production of a copy of this judgment.
3. The petitioner shall produce produce a copy of this
judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the
1st respondent for compliance. Before final orders are
passed, notice shall be given to the petitioner, and if
necessary to the 3rd respondent also.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg