High Court of KeralaWP(C)/35093/2015disposed of

R.O.Manju v. The State Of Kerala

2015-11-27Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/6TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 35093 of 2015 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- R.O.MANJU, AGED 39 YEARS W/O.LATE G.PRINCE, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT AMRITA HS, AMRITA HILLS, P.O.MOOLAVATTOM KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.M.SAJJAD RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, JAGATHY THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 001.

5. THE MANAGER AMRITA HIGH SCHOOL, AMRITA HILLS, P.O.MOOLAVATTOM KOTTAYAM DISTRICT686 012.

R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. VIJU THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 35093 of 2015 (J) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P-1:

TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 17.10.2015 EXT.P-2:

TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC NO.21282/2011 DATED 17.7.2013 EXT.P-3:

TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 15.9.2015 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL --------------------------------------- // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE SB

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

===================== W.P.(C) No.35093 of 2015 - J ====================== Dated this the 27th day of November, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is aggrieved with the non-consideration of Ext.P3 representation filed before the 1st respondent. The representation is filed on 15.09.2015.

2. In such circumstance, the 1st respondent definitely will have to look at the representation filed before it and consider the same in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of hearing. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations on merits, which the 1st respondent will consider, in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB/27/11/2015 // true copy // P.A to Judge.