IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31294 of 2009(F) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- P.PADMAJA DEVI, W/O.T.P.RAJENDRAKUMAR, AGED 39 YEARS, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT S.N.M.V.H.S.SCHOOL, VANNAPPURAM, THODUPUZHA. BY MR.V.A.MUHAMMED, ADVOCATE. MR.M.SAJJAD, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 5. THE MANAGER, S.N.M.V.H.S. SCHOOL, VANNAPPURAM, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 6. SMT.BINDU PAUL, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, S.N.M.V.H.S. SCHOOL, VANNAPPURAM, THODUPUZHA. WP(C).No. 31294 of 2009(F) ...2... 7. SMT.SANGEETHA.A., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT S.N.M.V.H.S.SCHOOL, VANNAPPURAM, THODUPUZHA. 8. SMT.BINDU.K., UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT S.N.M.V.H.S.SCHOOL, VANNAPPURAM, THODUPUZHA. BY MR. T.T. MUHAMOOD, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.31294 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an Upper Primary School Assistant working in S.N.M.V.H.S School, Vannappuram in Thodupuzha. The petitioner was appointed therein on 05.06.2006 in an anticipated new post. The approval of the same was declined as per Exhibit P1 and the appeal was also rejected as per Exhibit P2. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the appointment of the 6th respondent in a regular vacancy of Upper Primary School Assistant from 04.06.2007 has been approved as per Exhibit P3. She is also a fresh appointee. It is also the contention of the petitioner that when a regular post was got available, the petitioner should have been adjusted against the said post. Reliance is placed on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Geetha S. vs. Geo Thomas K. and others (2009(4) KHC 296). Exhibits P5 and P6 are the later orders whereby the appointments of respondents 7 and 8 were approved as Upper W.P.(C) No.31294/2009 2 Primary School Assistant from 05.06.2006. They were also granted approval against regular vacancies. The petitioner contends that the petitioner, being a senior in age, ought to have been granted approval against the regular vacancy. 3. Aggrieved by Exhibits P1, P2, P3, P5 and P6 orders rejecting approval of appointment of the petitioner, the petitioner has filed Exhibit P9 revision petition before the Director of Public Instruction. It is prayed that Exhibit P9 may be directed to be disposed of within a time frame. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4. There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P9, after hearing the petitioner and respondents 5 to 8, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp