IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2010 / 8TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 23815 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.N.RAJITHA, L.G.SANSKRIT TEACHER, N.N.N.M.U.P.SCHOOL, KARALMANNA, RESIDING AT CHERUMITTATH MANA, SREEKRISHNAPURAM, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL SRI.V.MADHUSUDHANAN SRI.T.ISSAC RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679101 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHERPULACHERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679503 4. THE MANAGER, N.N.N.M.U.P.SCHOOL, KARALMANNA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679506 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.DILIP MOHAN- R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.23815 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 30th July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was initially appointed as Peon in the N.N.N.M. U.P.School, Karalmanna with effect from 30.6.2001. The said appointment was approved. Later, a vacancy arose in the category of L.G. Sanskrit Teacher in the U.P. School. Since the petitioner possesses all the prescribed qualifications for appointment to the said post, the fourth respondent promoted and posted the petitioner as L.G. Sanskrit Teacher with effect from 4.6.2007. However, the said appointment of the petitioner as L.G. Sanskrit Teacher was declined to be approved first by the second respondent and then by the third respondent on the ground that the petitioner lacks the prescribed qualifications for appointment to the said post. The specific contention of the petitioner is that qualifications for appointment to the said post have been prescribed under Rule 3(2) of Chapter XXXI of the Kerala Education Rules. The petitioner possesses the aforesaid prescribed qualifications. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the action on the part of respondents 2 and 3 in declining approval of her appointment as L.G. Sanskrit Teacher is wholly unsustainable. In the circumstances, the petitioner has taken up the WP(C).No.23815/2010 2 matter in revision before the first respondent. Ext.P5 revision petition filed for that purpose is now pending before the first respondent. Considering the fact that Ext.P5 revision petition is pending before the first respondent, I think this Court need not look into the merits of the contentions at this stage. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 revision petition expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the petitioner and the fourth respondent. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS