IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2010 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36203 of 2010(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.USHA, AGED 42, W/O.SOMAN, U.P.S.A, NMHSS, THIRUNAVAYA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PAULSON THOMAS. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM- 685 002. 3. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR- 688 035. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. NISHA BOSE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.36203 OF 2010 ------------------------------ Dated this the 3 rd day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as UPSA at N.M.H.S.S Thirunavaya. She entered service on 7.6.1993 as UPSA. She was granted higher grade with effect from 1.7.2003. Based on the pay revision, the petitioner's pay was fixed with effect from 7.6.2005, as per Ext.P1. The Deputy Director of Education raised Ext.P2 objection to the fixation of pay of the petitioner. In compliance with Ext.P2 objection, the petitioner refunded Rs.17,203/-, the alleged objectionable amount drawn by the petitioner. As against Ext.P2, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation dated 2.5.2010 before the Government. Ext.P3 is pending disposal. The petitioner submits that as per Ext.P4 G.O.(P) 572/2007 dated 29.11.2007, the last date for availing reoption was 31.3.2008. Ext.P2 objection was raised in April 2010 and thereby the W.P.(C).No.36203 OF 2010 2 petitioner did not get the benefit of exercising reoption as provided in Ext.P5. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 3. Since Ext.P3 is pending before the first respondent, it is not necessary to consider the contentions raised by the petitioner on the merits. It is sufficient, if the first respondent is directed to dispose of Ext.P3 expeditiously. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if Ext.P3 is directed to be considered by the first respondent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 representation dated 2.5.2010 submitted by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate within a period of three months from the date W.P.(C).No.36203 OF 2010 3 of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms