High Court Kerala High Court

M. Syamala vs State Of Kerala on 20 July, 2007

Kerala High Court
M. Syamala vs State Of Kerala on 20 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 9713 of 2006(F)


1. M. SYAMALA, W/O. SURENDRAN,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. K.M. GEETHA, W/O. THAMBAN NAIR,
3. T.V. SUDHEERAN, S/O. P.GOVINDAN,
4. K. OMANA, W/O. M. CHANDU,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,

3. THE MANAGER,

4. THE PRINCIPAL,

5. KANNUR UNIVERSITY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS

                For Respondent  :SRI. K.JAJU BABU, SC, KANNUR UNIVERSITY

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER

 Dated :20/07/2007

 O R D E R
                          A.K. BASHEER, J.
                      --------------------------
                   W.P.(C). NO. 9713 OF 2006
                         ---------------------

                Dated this the 20th day of July, 2007

                           J U D G M E N T

Petitioners claim that they have been appointed as Last Grade

Employees (Gr.II) with effect from various dates between 1998 and

2000 in the college under the management of respondent No.3.

Their grievance is that approval for their appointments is being

denied without any valid or justifiable reasons.

2. I do not propose to deal with the various contentions raised

by the petitioners in support of their plea that their appointments are

liable to be approved by respondent No.2, in view of the limited

prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners at the Bar. He

submits that petitioners will be satisfied if an appropriate direction is

issued to respondent No.2 to take a decision on Exts.P5 and P6

proposals forwarded by the Principal to respondent No.2.

3. In the counter affidavit it is contended by respondent No.2

that petitioners are not entitled to get any relief in the writ petition and

that their appointments are not liable to be approved since they were

appointed during the ban period. Secondly there were excess non-

WPC NO.9713/06 Page numbers

teaching staff in the college at the time when the petitioners were

appointed.

4. Anyhow, these are all matters which have to be considered

by respondent No.2 at the time when a decision is taken on Exts. P5

& P6. It will open to respondent No.2 to take a decision in

accordance with law after affording sufficient opportunity to the

petitioners and the representative of the management to be heard.

Respondent No.2 shall take a decision on Exts. P5 & P6, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioners shall produce a

certified copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition

and the counter affidavit before respondent No.2 for compliance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.





                                              A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE


vps

WPC NO.9713/06    Page numbers




                               A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE


                                   OP NO.20954/00




                                        JUDGMENT


                                  1ST MARCH, 2007

WPC NO.9713/06    Page numbers