IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 5TH DECEMBER 2006 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA 1928 WP(C).No. 27340 of 2006(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- INDIRA V.V., HSST (SANSKRIT, JUNIOR), GOVT.SANSKRIT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, TRIPUNITHURA. BY ADV. SRI.D.SOMASUNDARAM RESPONDENT: ------------------- DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SHAKKEELA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/12/2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No. 27340 OF 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of December, 2006 JUDGMENT Petitioner approached this court against the rank assigned in Ext.P3. Case of the petitioner is that petitioner was appointed as HSST (Junior) in Sanskrit and earlier there was a mistake committed in so far as the petitioner's claim was not included in the list of HSAs, Sanskrit, and pursuant to Ext.P1 judgment respondent had issued an order promoting the petitioner as HSST (Junior) Sanskrit and in the said order, petitioner was assigned Sl.No.8(A). According to her, she should be placed after Jessy M. Mathew and before Smt. Jayakumari.R. By Ext.P3 the Director, Higher Secondary Education has regularised the appointment of the petitioner as HSST (Junior) in Sanskrit with effect from the date of joining duty. But petitioner is shown as Sl. No.10 even though Smt. Jessy M. Mathew was Sl. No.3 and Smt. Jayakumari is shown as Sl. No. 4. According to the petitioner, this is a mistake and on the basis of Ext.P3 petitioner will be prejudiced as vacancies in the post of HSST Sanskrit will be filled up on the said WPC. 27340 of 2006. 2 basis. 2. Today when the matter came up learned Government Pleader on instruction submits that on receiving complaint from the petitioner regarding her seniority, it was verified in detail and found that her grievance is valid and her seniority has been re-assigned as 5 instead of 11 and the order of declaration of probation is issued as such. In such circumstances, recording this submission, the writ petition is closed. However, I make it clear that if the petitioner is further aggrieved by the same, it is for the petitioner to work out her remedies in accordance with law. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb K.M.JOSEPH, JJ. - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A. No. OF - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Dated this the day of February, 2006.