High Court Kerala High Court

S.Jayaprakash vs State Of Kerala on 4 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
S.Jayaprakash vs State Of Kerala on 4 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 17338 of 2010(N)


1. S.JAYAPRAKASH, LITERACY TEACHER,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. THE DIRECTOR, SOCIAL WELFARE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :04/06/2010

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                  -------------------------
                  W.P.(C.) No.17338 of 2010 (N)
             ---------------------------------
               Dated, this the 4th day of June, 2010

                          J U D G M E N T

The petitioner, who is working as a Literacy Teacher, aspires

promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent cum Head Master

Grade-II. According to the petitioner, earlier when vacancies were

available, he claimed promotion and by Ext.P3 he was informed by

the 1st respondent that in the absence of vacancy his claim cannot

be considered. It is stated that thereafter there were two vacancies.

But, however, overlooking his claims appointments were made. It is

stated that now there are two vacancies available, one at Thrissur

and another at Kottayam, and that his claim is not considered. It is

with this grievance, this writ petition is filed.

2. From the pleadings, it is seen that when the petitioner

made representations on the earlier occasion, he was informed by

Ext.P3 that due to absence of vacancy his claim cannot be

considered. Now as according to the petitioner, there are two

vacancies available, it is only appropriate that the 1st respondent

WP(C) No.17338/2010
-2-

should consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the

post of Deputy Superintendent cum Head Master Grade-II.

3. Having regard to the above, I direct the 1st respondent to

consider Ext.P5 representation filed by the petitioner and pass

orders thereon. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at

any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this

judgment. It is directed that in the meanwhile one post of the two

vacancies, which are now available, shall be kept unfilled.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along

with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent for

compliance.

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg