IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2009 / 1ST POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 36340 of 2009(J) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SANDHYA SREENIVASAN,HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER(ENGLISH),M.S.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,RANNI. BY ADV. MR.S.JAYAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,CORPORATION BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CORPORATE MANAGER OF SCHOOLS, ST.THOMAS VALIYAPALLY EDAVAKA,RANNI. 4. SMT.DIVYA JAMES,HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER(ENGLISH),M.S.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, RANNI. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.MUHAMOOD T.T THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 36340 of 2009-J - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2009. JUDGMENT Herein, the petitioner is working as HSST (English) in M.S. Higher Secondary School, Ranni. The petitioner has different spells of appointments in the school and the appointment from 8.7.2006 to 28.11.2008 against a leave vacancy has been approved already. Again, when the leave vacancy was extended, the petitioner was allowed to continue till 28.11.2013 and she is still working in the leave vacancy and the said appointment has already been approved by order dated 19.2.2009 issued by the second respondent. 2. The present dispute is regarding the appointment in a permanent vacancy which arose on 1.6.2009. The third respondent appointed the 4th respondent in that vacancy on by transfer method without regularising the service of the petitioner. 3. The petitioner had submitted a request before the third respondent seeking for appointment in the regular post. The appointment of the 4th respondent has already been approved by the Regional Deputy Director. Ext.P1 is the copy of the said order. Against the same, the petitioner has wpc 36340/2009 2 filed Ext.P2 appeal before the Government. It is prayed that Ext.P2 may be directed to be disposed of within a time frame, as otherwise it will affect the rights of the petitioner. 3. Learned Govt. Pleader on instructions, submitted that Ext.P2 has not been traced out so far. In that view of the matter, the petitioner will refile Ext.P2 within a period of three weeks and the Government will take a decision on Ext.P2 thus filed, within a further period of three months after hearing the petitioner, the Manager and the new appointee. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/