Loading...

K.M.Nisha vs The Manager on 15 October, 2010

Kerala High Court
K.M.Nisha vs The Manager on 15 October, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP.No. 946 of 2010()


1. K.M.NISHA,W/O.K.B.SYALADASAN,AGED 25 YRS
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE MANAGER,KARSHAKA SAMAJAM UPPER
                       ...       Respondent

2. SMT.P.A.BINDU,PALLATH HOUSE,

3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

5. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS

6. SMT.M.K.SUNAJA,UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL

7. SMT.V.R.SREEREKHA,UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL

8. SMT.REKHA.M.C,LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN

 Dated :15/10/2010

 O R D E R
                    C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
                             P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.
               ....................................................................
                              R.P. No.946 of 2010 in
                        Writ Appeal No.2791 of 2009
               ....................................................................
               Dated this the 15th day of October, 2010.

                                          ORDER

Gopinathan, J.

Review petitioner, a third party to the judgment, would contend

that she got appointment on 1.6.2009 in the school managed by the first

respondent and because of the judgment dated 20.8.2010 in Writ

Appeal No.2791/2009, second respondent would get notional seniority

over the review petitioner and that the relief was granted without

hearing the review petitioner. With this plea she sought for review of

the judgment. We heard learned counsel appearing for the review

petitioner and perused the impugned judgment.

2. We see that by Ext.P5 judgment in W.P.(C) No.11172/2008

dated 19.12.2008 this court directed the first respondent to appoint the

second respondent, a claimant under Rule 51B of Chapter XIV A,

K.E.R., in pursuance of Ext.P4 order dated 22.10.2007 produced

therein issued by the District Educational Officer. Thereafter the first

R.P. 946/2010 2

respondent moved a Review Petition before the learned Single Judge

and then a revision before the Government. The revision was

dismissed by Ext.P7 order. Assailing Ext.P7, the first respondent filed

W.P.(C) No.21384/2009. The W.P.(C) was dismissed by judgment

dated 12.11.2009 against which Writ Appeal was filed. The review

petitioner was appointed on 1.6.2009 by the first respondent ignoring

the direction contained in Ext.P5 judgment dated 19.12.2008. While

dismissing W.A. No.2791/2009, the first respondent was directed to

enforce Ext.P5 judgment and to give notional seniority to the second

respondent. The review petitioner who obtained an order of

appointment from the first respondent subsequent to Ext.P5 is not

entitled to claim seniority over the second respondent. The order of

appointment of the review petitioner made by the first respondent

ignoring the writ issued by this court in Ext.P5 judgment would not

enure any service benefit or entitlement to the review petitioner as

against the second respondent. Since the so called appointment of the

review petitioner was subsequent to the writ issued by this court in

Ext.P5, there is no merit in the contention that she was not given a right

R.P. 946/2010 3

of audience. The Review Petition is devoid of any merit. Accordingly

it is dismissed. No costs.

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Judge

P.S.GOPINATHAN
Judge
pms

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information