Mariamma Alex vs Director Of Public Instructions on 26 March, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 1465 of 2010(G)


1. MARIAMMA ALEX, W/O.MONCY VARGHESE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

4. THE HEADMISTRESS, M.G.M.U.P.SCHOOL,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.SANEESH KUMAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :26/03/2010

 O R D E R
                               S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
                       ==================
                         W.P.(C).No. 1465 of 2010
                       ==================
                  Dated this the 26th day of March, 2010
                               J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is the wife of a disabled ex-serviceman and a

protected teacher serving in an aided school. The petitioner is

aggrieved by non-payment of salary due to the petitioner for various

periods.

2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 3rd

respondent, in which, it is stated thus in paragraph 7;

“7. The attitude of the Corporate Manager is (sic) not
submitting required details in time and the attitude and disobedience of
the Headmistress, MGMUPS Kottamala has caused the denial of salary in
time to the petitioner. This office as per order No.C/5122/09 dated
21.12.2009 requested the Manager to submit the proposal for lien
adjustment of the teacher w.e.f 15.7.2009 to 13.8.2009 and the request
of the Manager is received only on 25.1.2010 and the matter is now
taken up. Hence the argument of petitioner that this office is responsible
for denial and delayal of her salary is not true and is against the fact. The
Manager of the school and the Headmistress are responsible persons for
the denial.”

3. I have heard both sides.

4. In view of the averments in the counter affidavit quoted

above, the 3rd respondent is bound to take a decision in the matter

expeditiously. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed

of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to pass final orders in the

matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month

from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after

affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the

headmistress and the manager of the school.

Sd/-

sdk+                                                    S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

          ///True copy///




                                 P.A. to Judge

2