High Court Kerala High Court

Sangeetha D. vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 17 August, 2010

Kerala High Court
Sangeetha D. vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 17 August, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 25906 of 2010(K)


1. SANGEETHA D., W/O.B.RAJESH, AGED 35
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ANILA P.M., W/O.P.J.ROOPAK,

                        Vs



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

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,

3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

4. THE MANAGER, S.D.P.Y.SCHOOLS,

5. THE HEADMASTER, S.D.P.Y.GIRLS

6. THE HEADMASTER, S.D.P.Y. BOYS HIGH

7. SMT.NISHA ARAVIND, UPSA,

8. SMT.SANDHYA K.V., UPSA,

9. SMT.SINDHU G.NAIR,

10. SMT.JIJI,

11. SMT.SANTHA C.V., TEACHER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR

 Dated :17/08/2010

 O R D E R
                       C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

             - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                W.P. (C) No. 25906 OF 2010
             - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            Dated this the 17th day of August, 2010

                           J U D G M E N T

The petitioners were appointed as Upper Primary

School Assistants respectively, in SDPY, GVHSS, Palluruthy

and SDPY, BHS, Palluruthy, belonging to the 4th respondent.

The respondents 7 to 11 were appointed under the schools

belonging to the 4th respondent as Lower Primary School

Assistants. The grievance of the petitioner is that in

anticipation of reduction of posts in the category of LPSA

steps are already initiated to shift the petitioners to the

category of LPSA to avoid a possible retrenchment of

respondents 7 to 11. According to the petitioners such

shifting of posts is impermissible in law. But, they are not

allowed to mark their attendance as UPSA based on such

proposal, it is submitted. In the said circumstances, they

have preferred Exts.P9 and P10 before the 3rd respondent and

they are pending before the 3rd respondent.

2. Considering the fact that the petitioner have already

taken up their grievances before the 3rd respondent as per

WPC.No.25906/2010
: 2 :

Exts.P9 and P10 and that they are pending before the 3rd

respondent, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to

the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P9 and

P10 expeditiously, at any rate within a period of six weeks

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice

to the petitioners, 4th Respondent and to respondents 7 to 11.

Sd/-

(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)

jma

//true copy//
P.A to Judge