IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2010 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 1465 of 2010(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MARIAMMA ALEX, W/O.MONCY VARGHESE, AGED 40 YERS, FULL TIME LOWER GRADE (HINDI) TEACHER, M.G.M.U.P. SCHOOL, KOTTAMALA.P.O., KASARAGODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KASARAGODE. 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHITTARICKAL. 4. THE HEADMISTRESS, M.G.M.U.P.SCHOOL, KOTTAMALA, KASARAGODE DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.K.SANEESH KUMAR FOR R4 GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.SANDESH RAJA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 1465/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE TRANSFER ORDER DTD.7.8.09. P2. COPY OF THE REPLY BY R4. P3. COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY R3. P4. COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.19.12.09. P5. COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.4.12.09 TO R3. P6. COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF R4 TO R3 DTD.15.12.09. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 1465 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 26th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the wife of a disabled ex-serviceman and a protected teacher serving in an aided school. The petitioner is aggrieved by non-payment of salary due to the petitioner for various periods. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent, in which, it is stated thus in paragraph 7; “7. The attitude of the Corporate Manager is (sic) not submitting required details in time and the attitude and disobedience of the Headmistress, MGMUPS Kottamala has caused the denial of salary in time to the petitioner. This office as per order No.C/5122/09 dated 21.12.2009 requested the Manager to submit the proposal for lien adjustment of the teacher w.e.f 15.7.2009 to 13.8.2009 and the request of the Manager is received only on 25.1.2010 and the matter is now taken up. Hence the argument of petitioner that this office is responsible for denial and delayal of her salary is not true and is against the fact. The Manager of the school and the Headmistress are responsible persons for the denial.” 3. I have heard both sides. 4. In view of the averments in the counter affidavit quoted above, the 3rd respondent is bound to take a decision in the matter expeditiously. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to pass final orders in the matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the headmistress and the manager of the school. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2