IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 2ND ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 25219 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SMT.B.LAILA DEVI, W/O.E.D.MANMATHAN, ERANDATHARA HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM POST, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.K.MADHU SMT.C.N.NOORUL HIDAYA SRI.RAJITHA T.R. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO STATE (EDUCATION), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE UNDER SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, LITTLE FLOWER HIGH SCHOOL, NARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED FOR R4 SRI.K.E.HAMZA FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.25219/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT The whole controversy in this writ petition is regarding the approval of the petitioner's appointment as Headmistress as per Ext.P2. Admittedly the matter is now pending before the 3rd respondent, before whom proposal for approval made by the Manager is pending. It being a statutory proposal, necessarily the 3rd respondent shall take a decision on it. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the 3rd respondent shall take a decision on the proposal made by the Manager for approval of the appointment of the petitioner effected by Ext.P2. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 6 weeks of receipt of a copy of the judgment. 2 Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the 3rd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. 3