Sr.Jalaja Job v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 35999 of 2015 (Y) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:
------------------- JALAJA JOB, AGED 45 YEARS D/O. JOB, S.D.CONVENT, ANAKULAM IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN CODE-685565.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.M.KURIAN SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENTS:
------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ADIMALY ADIMALY P.O., PIN-685561.
3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER KATTAPPANA, KATTAPPANA P.O., PIN-685508.
4. THE MANAGER CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, DIOCESE OF IDUKKI MANIPPARA P.O., KARIMPAN, PIN-685602 IDUKKI DISTRICT.
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. A. LOWSY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 35999 of 2015 (Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER POSTING OF THE PETITIONER DATED 01-06-2015.
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17-10-2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 30-05-2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 10-05-2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 06-11-2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS -------------------------------------- NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE SD
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
--------------------------------------- W.P(C). No.35999 of 2015-Y --------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of November, 2015.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is challenging Ext.P2 order, against which there is an appeal provided under the Kerala Education Rules, 1959. In such circumstance, the petitioner would have to seek resort to the alternate remedy and not approach this Court under Article 226.
Reserving such liberty, the writ petition would stand closed, leaving open all the contentions of the petitioner. Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE.
//True Copy// P.A. to Judge.
sp/30/11/15