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suspension has been revoked and consequential direction has been issued to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
