IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 20752 of 2009(L)
1. SABNA R.KRISHNAN, L.P.S.A.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO
... Respondent
2. THE DRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
5. THE MANAGER, A.P. SCHOOL KARINKALLAI,
6. MISS.DEEPA M.P., L.P.S.A.,
For Petitioner :SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :24/07/2009
O R D E R
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C). No.20752/2009-L
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 24th day of July, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner herein is a claimant under Rule 51A of Chapter XIV A
K.E.R. She was appointed as Lower Primary School Assistant by the fifth
respondent provisionally for the periods given below:-
02/06/1999 to 02/08/1999,
02/11/1999 to 15/03/2000,
16/03/2000 to 31/03/2000
06/06/2001 to 24/08/2001 and
03/06/2003 to 31/08/2003.
The said orders have been produced as Exts.P1 to P4(a). It is pointed out
that all the appointments have been approved by the fourth respondent and
the petitioner has received salary also. Again by Ext.P5, she was given a
regular appointment in the post of L.P.S.A with effect from 28/08/2003.
2. It is also pointed out that the sixth respondent was given
appointment in a vacancy which arose on 02/06/2003 and she is not a
claimant under Rule 51A of Chapter XIV A K.E.R. The learned counsel for
the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was entitled for accommodation
W.P.(C). No.20752/2009
-:2:-
in the earlier vacancy which arose on 02/06/2003 and therefore, the
appointment of the sixth respondent was not liable to be approved.
Complaining about the irregularity in the matter, it is pointed out that the
petitioner had been submitting representations by way of Exts.P7 and P8
before the fourth respondent, but without any result. It was in these
circumstances, the petitioner had approached the third respondent by
another representation (Ext.P8(a). Still the petitioner did not get any reply
in the matter. Therefore, the petitioner has filed Ext.P9 before the first
respondent. It is prayed that the first respondent may be directed to take a
decision on Ext.P9 within a time frame.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for
respondent Nos.1 to 4. The first respondent will take a decision on Ext.P9
after hearing the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6 within a period of
four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
ms