IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2011 / 22ND POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1088 of 2011(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- DHANYA ANANDH, PTLG SANSKRIT TEACHER, S.N.D.P.U.P.S. MEKKOZHOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADVS. SRI.RAJIT SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 501. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, RANNY, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645. 5. THE GENERAL MANAGER, CORPORATE MANAGEMENT OF SNDP YOGAM SCHOOLS, P.B.NO.512, KOLLAM-691 001. 6. DIVYA V.S., PTLG SANSKRIT TEACHER, UDAYAMPEROOR, ERNAKULAM, NOW WORKING AS FTLG SANSKRIT TEACHER, S.N.A. UPS, PADIYOOR P.O., KANNUR-670 001. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C).No. 1088 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner herein has been appointed as PTLG Sanskrit Teacher in the S.N.D.P.U.P.S Mekkozhoor with effect from 06.06.2008 against the promotion vacancy of 6th respondent as FTLG Sanskrit Teacher in S.N.D.P.H.S.S, Udayamproor. The approval of appointment was not granted in the light of the fact that the promotion of 6th respondent was not approved. The matter was taken up before the appellate authority by the Manager, which was rejected by Ext.P2 order. Further appeal was taken up before the third respondent, who also dismissed the same. It is the case of the petitioner that the appointment of the promotee has been approved as per Exts.P4 and P5 orders. In these circumstances, the Manager has filed Ext.P6 appeal before the Government. Petitioner has also moved the Government after the appointment of the 6th respondent was approved, as per Ext.P9 representation. Earlier Government by Ext.P7 took the view that the promottee's appointment is yet to be approved. W.P.(C).No. 1088 of 2011 2 Now that the appointment of the promottee has been approved by the competent authority, it is only reasonable that the claim of the petitioner is considered in the light of the same. 2. There will be a direction to the Government to take a decision on Ext.P9 representation with notice to the petitioner and the Manager within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner will produce a copy of this Writ Petition along with a copy of this judgment to the first respondent for compliance. No costs. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. ln