High Court Kerala High Court

Sreebha V.B. vs The Kerala State Public Service on 24 February, 2009

Kerala High Court
Sreebha V.B. vs The Kerala State Public Service on 24 February, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 5166 of 2007(M)


1. SREEBHA V.B., AGED 33,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE KERALA STATE PUBLIC SERVICE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF KERALA HIGHER SECONDARY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :24/02/2009

 O R D E R
                        T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          W.P.(C). No.5166/2007-M
                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                 Dated this the 24th day of February, 2009

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is aggrieved by the delay in issuance of posting

order to her inspite of Ext.P1 advice memo issued by the Public Service

Commission. The petitioner was included in the ranked list for the post of

Higher Secondary School Teacher, Socialogy (Senior) in the Kerala Higher

Secondary Education Department.

2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the P.S.C and the

learned Government Pleader. In the counter affidavit of the second

respondent, it is stated that the name of the petitioner is seen in the advice

sent by the P.S.C against two vacancies. But, however, no advice have been

sent against Sreeja, the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.3820/2008. Today, W.P.

(C).No.3820/2008 also has been closed by a separate judgment. It is

submitted at the bar that re-advice was as per the judgment in

W.A.No.2196/2007 produced as R2(c).

3. As against the petitioner, there is a valid advice made by the

P.S.C. Therefore, there is no justification for delaying the issuance of

appointment order to the petitioner.

W.P.(C) No.5166/2007
-:2:-

4. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. There will be a

direction to the second respondent to issue appropriate orders granting

appointment to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of

receipt of the copy of this judgment. No costs.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

ms