IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2011 / 6TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 7341 of 2011(P) ------------------------------ PETITIONER: -------------- T.SUMATHY, AGED 50 YEARS, D/O.KELAPPAN, (TEACHER UNDER SUSPENSION, ELAYIDOM B.V.L.P. SCHOOL, NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE), RESIDING AT SURAJ BHAVAN, CHOKKLI P.O., THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE – 673 101. 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, NADAPURAM, KALLACHI, KOZHIKODE – 673 506. 4. THE MANAGER, ELAYIDOM B.V.L.P.SCHOOL, KATAMERY P.O., VILLIYAPPILLI (VIA), VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT – 673 542. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.KUNHABDULLA FOR R4 BY SMT. NISHA BOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.7341/2011 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF MEMO OF CHARGES DTD. 27.7.09 ISSUED BY R4. EXT. P2 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD. 13.10.09 IN WP(C) 17904/09 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT. P3 : COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DTD. 5.4.10 OF R3. EXT. P4 : COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DTD. 10.6.10 OF R2. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.7341 OF 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of June, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to the Manager to reinstate the petitioner as the suspension order has been interfered with by the officers of the Department. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Manager has reinstated the petitioner by order dated 10.06.2011. What remains is the claim of the petitioner for disbursement of pay and allowances, subsistence allowances etc. It is also submitted that the Manager has reinstated the petitioner after closing the disciplinary proceedings by treating the period of suspension as eligible leave. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be granted an opportunity to challenge that portion of the order by which the period of suspension has been treated as eligible leave. W.P.(C) No.7341/2011 2 Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider the grievance regarding non- disbursement of pay and allowances as well as subsistence allowances and appropriate action will be taken in the matter to see that eligible benefits are disbursed to the petitioner within a period of two months. It is made clear that this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 10.06.2011 with regard to the direction therein that her suspension period will be treated as eligible leave. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp