Resmy.K.R v. The Director Of Public Instructions

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 36945 of 2015 (P) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- RESMY.K.R, L.P.S.A, S.N.V.UP SCHOOL THALIKULAM, UNDER ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER VALAPPAD BY ADVS.SRI.C.D.DILEEP SMT.SHYLAJA VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S):

---------------------------- 1.

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

2.

THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DIST. 680 506 3.

THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER ALAPPAD, THRISSUR DIST.-680567 4.

THE MANAGER, S.N.V.U.P SCHOOL THALIKULAM, THRISSUR - 680 301.

R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. A. LOWSY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 36945 of 2015 (P) APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:

EXT.P1 COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL DATED 01.06.11 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT MANAGER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT AEO EXT.P2 COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G2170/11 DTD. 16.4.12 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT AEO REJECTING EXT.P1 APPLICATION.

EXT.P3 COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD. 28.5.12 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT MANAGER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DEO CHALLENGING EXT.P2.

EXT.P4 COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B1-4436/12/L DIS. DTD. 12.7.12 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DEO REJECTING EXT.P3 APPEAL.

EXT.P5 COPY OF THE GOVT. ORDER DTD. DIRECTING THE 3RD RESPONDENT AEO TO GRANT SALARY AND OTHER FINANCIAL BENEFITS TO THE LWA AVAILED TEACHER.

EXT.P6 COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DTD. 14.11.15 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH RECIEPT. WITHOUT EXHIBIT.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBTS:

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

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

===================== W.P.(C) No.36945 of 2015 - P ====================== Dated this the 07th day of December, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is aggrieved with the non-consideration of Ext.P6 revision filed before the 1st respondent. The revision is filed on 14.11.2015.

2. In such circumstance, the 1st respondent definitely will have to look at the revision 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/07/12/2015 // true copy // P.A to Judge.