Loading...

P.A.Smitha vs The State Of Kerala Represented By on 6 July, 2009

Kerala High Court
P.A.Smitha vs The State Of Kerala Represented By on 6 July, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18646 of 2009(A)


1. P.A.SMITHA, W/O.RAJEEV C.MENON,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,

3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

4. THE HEADMASTER,

5. THE MANAGER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :06/07/2009

 O R D E R
                    T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                         W.P.(C). No.18646/2009-A
                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                     Dated this the 6th day of July, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

The petitioner herein is a Music Teacher under the fifth respondent

Manager. The petitioner was suspended from service as per Ext.P3 order of

the Manager. The petitioner challenged the same before the Director of

Public Instruction, who passed Ext.P10 order, by which the Manager was

directed to reinstate the petitioner in service. There was a further direction

that the District Educational Officer will conduct detailed enquiry and

furnish report to the Manager for finalising the disciplinary action against

the teacher. The petitioner thereafter moved the Manager by filing Ext.P11

seeking to comply with the order. Since the Manager did not take any

action, she approached the District Educational Officer also by submitting

Ext.P12 representation. Ext.P13 is the copy of the memo of charges served

on the petitioner. Presently, the Manager is not taking any action pursuant

to the order passed by the Director of Public Instruction, contends the

petitioner. The petitioner had filed a detailed representation before the

Manager as per Ext.P14 against Ext.P13 memo of charges. Finally,the

petitioner has approached the Director of Public Instruction by filing

W.P.(C). No.18646/2009
-:2:-

Ext.P16 representation. The petitioner has got a contention that since

suspension has been revoked and consequential direction has been issued to

reinstate the petitioner, she is entitled for pay and allowance from that date

also.

2. Heard the learned Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

3. In view of the above circumstances, the learned counsel for the

petitioner submitted that the Director of Public Instruction may be directed

to take appropriate decision on Ext.P16 within a time frame. In the light of

the facts pointed above, there will be a direction to the second respondent to

take a decision on Ext.P16 after hearing the petitioner and the fifth

respondent Manager within a period of one month from the date of receipt

of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of the writ

petition along with a copy of the judgment before the second respondent for

compliance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

ms

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