IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2010 / 11TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20615 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- VIJAYALEKSHMY, D/O. KAMALAMMA, AGED 42, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT,(UNDER SUSPENSION) NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, NELLIMOOD. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SRI. SIVANKUTTY, JOINT COMMISSIONER FOR GOVERNMENT EXAMINATIONS PAREEKSHA BHAVAN THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, NEYYATTINKARA. 5. THE HEADMASTER/CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT OF EXAM/ NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, NELLIMOOD. PIN-695574. 6. THEMANAGGER, NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, NELLIMOODU PIN-675574. R1,R2 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. DILIP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------------------- WP (C) No. 20615 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T ........................... This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner who is working as High School Assistant in New H.S.S., Nellimood against Exhibit P4 order of suspension. Essentially, Exhibit P4 is an order passed by invoking the power under Section XII A of the Kerala Education Act read with Rule 6 of Chapter XIV A in the Kerala Education Rules, by the second respondent. Feeling aggrieved by Exhibit P4 order, the petitioner has approached the 2nd respondent through Exhibit P7 dated 25.05.2010. The grievance of the petitioner is that no orders have, so far, been passed on Exhibit P7 by the second respondent. 2. In view of the order I propose to pass in this Writ Petition, I do not think it is necessary to deal with the 2 WP (C) No. 20615 of 2010 contentions raised by the petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner has already approached the 2nd respondent raising her grievance against Exhibit P4 and with a request to revoke the order of suspension. Exhibit P7 is, now, pending before the second respondent. Therefore, without making any observation as to the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of, with a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P7 expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE.