High Court Kerala High Court

P.Padmaja Devi vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 9 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
P.Padmaja Devi vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 9 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 5490 of 2010(I)


1. P.PADMAJA DEVI,W/O.T.P.RAJENDRAKUMAR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,

4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

5. THE MANAGER,S.N.M.V.H.S.SCHOOL,

6. SMT.BINDU PAUL,UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL

7. SMT.SANGEETHA.A,UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL

8. SMT.BINDU.K,UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :09/03/2010

 O R D E R
                                S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
                         ==================
                           W.P.(C).No. 5490 of 2010
                         ==================
                    Dated this the 9th day of March, 2010
                                J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a UPSA working in the 5th respondent’s school. Her

grievance in this writ petition is that she has been accommodated against a

temporary vacancy, while others, who are younger in age, have been

accommodated against permanent vacancies. The petitioner would contend

that such action of the manager of the school is against the law laid down by

this Court in Epuru Sudhakar v. Government of Andhra Pradesh [2006 (4)

KLT S.N. 62 Case No.85] and Geetha.S. v. Geo Thomas.K. & others [2009

(4) KHC 296]. In the above circumstances, the petitioner had filed a revision

petition before the 2nd respondent under Rule 8A of Chapter XIV-A of the

KER. But, by Ext.P11 order, the revision petition was rejected. The petitioner

has now filed Ext.P13 further revision petition before the 1st respondent. The

petitioner seeks a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders

on Ext.P13 expeditiously.

2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also.

3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ

petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on

Ext.P13, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months 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 respondents 5 to 8.

Sd/-

sdk+                                                  S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

          ///True copy///




                                 P.A. to Judge

2