IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2009 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7470 of 2008(L) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SREEJA T., AGED 31 YEARS, W/O. RAJAN N.K., L.P.S.A., A.L.P.SCHOOL,CHELEMBRA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, RESIDING AT THIRUVANGATT, CHELEMBRA POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN, MR.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PARAPPANANGADI. * 2. THE HEADMISTRESS, MANAGER, A.L.P.SCHOOL, CHELEMBRA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. *R2 CORRECTED: R2. THE HEADMISTRESS, A.L.P.SCHOOL, CHELEMBRA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. *R2 IS CORRECTED AS PER ORDER DTD. 4/03/2008 IN WPC.NO.7470/08 AS PER THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. A.J.VARGHESE R2 BY ADV. MR.M.P.VIJAYAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ====================================== W.P.(C)No.7470 of 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 2nd day of March 2009 JUDGMENT Smt.Latha Prabhakaran, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the main relief sought in the writ petition has become infructuous for the reason that the second respondent has forwarded the petitioner's service book to the first respondent. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is however aggrieved by the date with effect from which the re- option exercised by her pursuant to G.O.(P)No.572/07/(83)/Fin. dated 29.11.2007 takes effect and the date with effect from which the first time bound higher grade was granted to her under the 2004 pay revision order. The learned counsel submits that without prejudice to the petitioner's right to challenge the correctness of the orders passed by the Assistant Educational Officer in that regard, this writ petition may be closed as infructuous. 2. On going through the pleadings and on hearing the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing on either side, I feel that the said request merits acceptance. I accordingly dismiss this writ petition as infructuous without prejudice to the petitioner's right to challenge the orders passed by the Assistant Educational Officer, Parappanangadi in the matter of the re-option exercised by her pursuant to G.O.(P) No.572/07/(83)/Fin.dated W.P.(C)No.7470 of 2008 2 29.11.2007 and also the date with effect from which the first time bound higher grade was sanctioned to her under the 2004 pay revision order. The petitioner may move the competent authority for redressel of her grievances in that regard. The Writ Petition is closed as infructuous with the observations made above. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE css/