IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 5TH DECEMBER 2008 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 35985 of 2008(H) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ DR. LISSY E.A, W/O. FRANCIS P.V., AGED 50 YEARS, READER IN COMMERCE, VIMALA COLLEGE, P.O. ENGINEERING COLLEGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, RES. AT PALATTY HOUSE, P.O. ENGINEERING COLLEGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANATNHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVNANTHAPURAM. 3. THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI, PIN 110002, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, VIMALA COLLEGE, P.O. ENGINEERING COLLEGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. A.J.VARGHESE FOR R1 & R2 ADV. SRI. S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, SC FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/12/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.35985/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is working as a Reader in commerce under the 4th respondent. In this writ petition the complaint of the petitioner is that she was not given the two advance increments being a Ph.D holder. There upon the petitioner complained to the first respondent by submitting Ext.P1 and the first respondent called for the report of the Deputy Director as is seen from Ext.P2 submitted by the Deputy Director. Petitioner alleges that even thereafter the 2nd respondent has not passed final orders on Ext.P1. It is complaining of this, the writ petition has been filed. 2. If as stated by the petitioner, Ext.P1 is still pending, it is for the 2nd respondent to consider the same in the light of Ext.P2 submitted by the Deputy Director. Therefore, I direct that the 2nd respondent shall consider Ext.P1 in the 2 light of Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 6 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. 3