K.M.Jameelamma vs The Director Of Public … on 18 December, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35560 of 2008(G)


1. K.M.JAMEELAMMA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

4. THE CORPORATE MANAGER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC, TDB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :18/12/2008

 O R D E R
                           ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                          ==============
                    W.P.(C) NO. 35560 OF 2008 (G)
                                     &
             CONT.COURT CASE(C) NO.1744 OF 2008(S)
             ===========================

             Dated this the 18th day of December, 2008

                             J U D G M E N T

The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P4, an order passed

by the DPI directing recovery of 50% of the excess salary from the

petitioner and another teacher. The main contention raised was that the

said order runs counter to Ext.P3 judgment. It is on that basis that

contempt case was also filed.

2. After this writ petition was admitted and notice was issued in

the contempt petition, DPI has revoked Ext.P4 order and passed a fresh

order dated 3/12/2008.

3. In view of the aforesaid developments, both the writ petition

and contempt are closed, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue the

matter if she is aggrieved.

The counsel for the petitioner pleaded for awarding costs.

Considering the fact that the respondents themselves have corrected the

mistake, I do not think it appropriate to pass such an order.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp