IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2008 / 19TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 20735 of 2008(R) PETITIONER: L.SUDHARMAKUMARI, ULIYANGATTU HOUSE EDAVATTOM, VELLIMON PO, KOLLAM 691511, (TYPEWRITING INSTRUCTOR, GHS FOR BLIND, KUNNAMKULAM) BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND RESPONDENTS: 1. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE HEADMASTER, GHS FOR BLIND KUNNAMKULAM PO, THRISSUR DISTRICT 3. C.MANJUSHA, KUNNEKKATU HOUSE, KOTTAPPADY P.O., KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT (TYPEWRITING INSTRUCTOR,GHS BLIND, KUNNAMKULAM) BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 20735 OF 2008 R -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th July, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner states that she has worked for a quite long time as Typewriting Instructor in Government High School for blind, Kunnamkulam. Ext.P1 communication dated 2.7.1999 was issued to the petitioner intimating her to execute an agreement in connection with the posting as Typewriting Instructor. It is stated that the petitioner was transferred to Government High School for blind, Kunnamkulam as per Ext.P2 and she worked there from 2000-01 to 2007-08. It is further stated that the second respondent, Headmaster, conducted an interview on 19.6.2008 for selection to the post of Typewriting Instructor and that the third respondent was appointed as the Typewriting Instructor. The petitioner is aggrieved by the manner in which the interview was held and the third respondent was selected. Petitioner submitted Ext.P5 representation dated 2.7.2008 to the Director of Public Instructions pointing out her grievances. 2. The only relief sought for by the petitioner is for a direction to the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P5 representation. 3. Ext.P5 is dated 2.7.2008, The Writ Petition came up for W.P.(C) NO.20735 OF 2008 :: 2 :: admission on 10.7.2008. Normally, it cannot be expected that the Director of Public Instructions would be able to dispose of the representation within this short time. At the same time, the petitioner expects that her representation will be considered by the Director of Public Instructions without delay. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P5 representation expeditiously and, at any rate, within a period of two months, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3. Since the Writ Petition is being disposed of in the manner indicated above, I do not think that it is necessary to issue notice to respondents 2 and 3 causing much inconvenience to them. The petitioner shall send a copy of the judgment to respondents 2 and 3 separately by registered post and shall produce proof of the same before the Director of Public Instructions without delay. The petitioner shall also produce certified copy of the judgment and a copy of the Writ Petition before the Director of Public Instructions. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/