IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2007 / 25TH ASHADHA 1929 WP(C).No. 21141 of 2007(P) -------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- E.K.NISHA,W/O.MANI, KARYAZHATH HOUSE, P.O. PERINJANAM WEST- 680 686. THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.BOSE SRI.VINOD MADHAVAN SMT.NISHA BOSE RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THRISSUR. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD. 4. THE MANAGER, R.M.V.H.S. SCHOOL, PERINJANAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT -680 686. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.21141 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of July, 2007 JUDGMENT Petitioner claims that she had worked in the school under the management of respondent no.4 for sometime on daily wage basis in the leave vacancy of a Malayalam teacher. According to her, she worked for 30 days during 2004. Still later in the year 2005 she was again engaged in the school. It is further contended by the petitioner that she had paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as donation to the manager. The grievance of the petitioner is that the manager is not giving her appointment in the school. Ext.P2 is stated to be an advertisement which appeared in a newspaper in April 2007 through which the manager had invited applications from eligible candidates for appointment to various posts in the school. She has got requisite qualification to be appointed as High School Assistant. 2. I do not propose to deal with the contention raised by the petitioner that she is eligible to get appointment in the school. If the petitioner has got any statutory remedy, it will be open to her to seek appropriate reliefs seeking intervention of the authorities concerned. It is pointed out by the learned counsel that the W.P.(C)No.21141 OF 2007 :: 2 :: petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 representation before respondent no.3 in this regard. The limited prayer is to issue a direction to the said authority to take a decision on Ext.P4 expeditiously. 3. In the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.3 to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 strictly on its merit and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to mention that the petitioner and the manager of the school shall be afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before any decision is taken in the matter. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with a certified copy of the judgment before respondent no.3 for compliance. Similarly, she shall also send copies of the said documents to respondent no.4, the manager, also by registered post within seven days from today for information. Writ petition is disposed of as above. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE jes