IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 12010 of 2009(U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- LIJI JOSE.P., AGED 29 YEARS, W/O.BABU, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MALAYALAM) HIGH SCHOOL, THIRUVALAYANNUR, P.O.KALLOOR, VADAKKEKAD, THRISSUR-679 562. BY ADVS. MR.V.A.MUHAMMED MR.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. THE MANAGER, HIGH SCHOOL, THIRUVALAYANNUR, P.O.KALLOOR, VADAKKEKAD, THRISSUR-679 562. 6. SMT.SHERINE, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MALAYALAM), HIGH SCHOOL, THIRUVALAYANNUR, P.O.KALLOOR, VADAKKEKAD, THRISSUR-679 562. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.T.T.MUHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.Ravindran, J. ================== W.P.(C) No.12010 of 2009 ===================== Dated this the 8th day of April, 2009. JUDGMENT Heard Sri. V.A.Muhammed, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. T.T.Muhamood, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to or hear respondents 5 and 6. 2. The fifth respondent Manager appointed the petitioner as H.S.A. (Malayalam) by order passed on 4.6.2007. The District Educational Officer declined to approve the said appointment on the ground that there was no vacancy against which the petitioner can be accommodated. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the Director of Public Instruction. It appears that in the meanwhile the sixth respondent was appointed against an additional vacancy but that appointment was also not approved. Later, a retirement vacancy arose and the petitioner was appointed in that vacancy. However, by Ext.P4 order passed on 5.11.2007, the Director of Public Instruction declined to approve the petitioner's appointment. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner has filed Ext.P5 revision petition before the Government seeking approval of appointment with effect from 4.6.2007. 3. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks a direction to WP(C) 12010/09 -: 2 :- the Secretary to Government to consider Ext.P5 revision petition and pass orders thereon within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. The pleadings disclose that the petitioner was appointed on 4.6.2007. Nearly two years have passed thereafter. Rule 92 of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules empowers the Government to revise the orders impugned in Ext.P5. Since the petitioner has invoked a statutory remedy available to her, I am of the opinion that the Government should consider Ext.P5 and pass orders thereon expeditiously. In these circumstances, I dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to the Secretary to Government, General Education Department to consider Ext.P5 revision petition and pass orders thereon after notice to and affording the petitioner and respondents 5 and 6 a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Final orders in the matter shall be passed within four months from the date on which the petitioner produces a copy of this Writ Petition along with a certified copy of this judgment before the Secretary to Government, General Education Department. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess