High Court Karnataka High Court

Anita Lillian W/O Rajabhushanam E … vs Thestate Of Karnataka on 23 July, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Anita Lillian W/O Rajabhushanam E … vs Thestate Of Karnataka on 23 July, 2008
Author: N.K.Patil
.1.
N THE F-HGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA

DATED T!-HS THE 23"' DAY OF JULY, 2008
: BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PATIL

W.P.N0. 49033 of 2093 (S-RES)  j   " 

BETWEEN:

SMIANITA LiLLlAN
WIORAJABHUSHANAM EPAUL, . _ .
AGED Aaour 39 YEARS, ' _  
PRE$ENTLY womme AS ASSJSTANT TEACHER

am UNN MEMOREAL HKSHER PRMARY SCHOOL, _ 
OPP.R.-MLWAY smnow, .  . 
GULBARGA. V  L

%  
(BY SRLVEERESH 3.PATu.j,"A.pvoq;Afé.)  T V V 

AND:

1. THE 513372 OF'KARN£x-TAi<A  ' __
Rapasseismsca B'x'V.lTS~--$ECRE_TA£'eza}x::La:rto:saAL coisétiéfiiéstowea

go

. T FQR PUBLIC .iN3TRUCTiQN3
 ~Eaus:,ATIprwE,PARTMENT,
  

T:%E DEPLlTY}Dil§ECTOR os= PUBUC NSTRUGTION
. GU'L8AFiGA'BISTRlCT,
V GULBARGJ-\

-.1' 3. T  j ..  rHEsL<j§<:K EDUCATION omcea,

_ 'DEPARTMENT CJF PUBLIC INSTRUCTKJN,
" . GULBARGA (SOUTH) TALUK,
GULBARGA.

V' ' ' -._ af  "THE HEAD MSTRESS,
' » .. . ' {ANN MEMORW. KANNADA HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL,

 



-3-
netificafion dated 7.4.2096, petitioner has been declared

as excess teacher and she has been transferred.--to

another school. Subsequentiy, thereafter, enothfjer_f--v_'

notification has been issued on 21.1.2003 holdin9:"ie'liiA  

the teachers who were trmted as eiicees   it

year 2006 and who were transferred::'*to' 

should be reverted back to their  *p_aren.t 
and accordingly, petitioneHr~i~.hae'iBeen .1_rei'ieved'vv'Aand she
has joined the  respondentsch'ool'A'b~:on'--V" 11.2.2003.

lnspite of her endi bill regarding
payment of her 2008 till as on the

date of fiiing–« request has not been

ner the”se~%ary has been released to her.

Therefoi’e’,fshe’VVi€as constrained to give representation on

ii-isnnexure~N. The said representation

‘ petitioner has been neither considered nor

4’_’e.nyV_i:i’eei’sion has been taken by me respondents-3 and 4

in View of inec’ n the part of respondents-3

..4..

and 4, petitioner was constrained to approach this Court

by presenting this writ petition seeking appropriate relief,..____

3. l have heard learned counsel appearing?

petitioner and learned Additional Government

appearing for respondents-1 to 4.

4. Learned Additional; Gavernrnent

appearing for respondents-1 to eirbrnitted
fi1at, the representation VA by» petitioner ‘dated

4.6.2008 vide Annexur:e«:-‘l*-lv:..fwillv*– and

appropriate det:ieionii’;i_rgI_i;ll be rai<en._'ir;if4'aecordance with law,
if not already conai*d.er_ed faker: any decision.

5. in ‘the iighfoi’ made by learned

–Additienial’v: Governnient: Advocate appearing for

Vres’p.enden%’e-1 without exprmsing any epinien on the

meriieand of this case, it would suffice for fiwis

if” appropriate directions are issued to ‘H16

*–reependents -3 and 4 to consider the representation

‘j:’e-obniifled by petitioner dated 4.6.2008 vide Annexure-N.

/are

-5-

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of

the case as stated above, the writ petition flied by

petitioner is disposed of, with a direction

respondents-3 and 4 to consider the reprfeseintsjtiort it

submitted by petitioner dated

and dispose of the same, as expeditiousiy as

any rate, within a period of four from dste of
receipt of a copy of this considered
and disposed of. %

With theifurritiipetifion filed by
petitioner stands * i ”

Learned’ Advocate is

to;fi!e_ cisppearsnce for respondents–1

frcm today.

Sd/-

Judge