IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 11TH MAY 2010 / 21ST VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14628 of 2010(C) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- MARY JAIN P.C., HEADMISTRESS, ST.JOSEPH HIGH SCHOOL, CHATHEDAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION), ERNAKULAM. 3. THE CORPORATE MANAGER, CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, DIOCESE OF KOTTAPPURAM P.O., KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 14628 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is presently working as Headmistress in St.Joseph High School, Chathedam, Ernakulam District which is under the management of 3rd respondent. Pursuant to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Rule 75 of Chapter XIV- A of Kerala Education Rules imposition of the penalty of reversion to the post of HSA was proposed by the 3rd respondent. According to the petitioner sanction has been granted by the Deputy Director for the said proposal as per Ext.P10. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P10 order dated 29.4.2010, the petitioner has preferred statutory appeal before the first respondent as is evident from Ext.P11. Ext.P11 is dated 5.5.2010. It is in the said circumstances, this writ petitioner has been filed mainly with the prayer to quash Ext.P10 and to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P11 within a time limit. 2. Admittedly, Ext.P11 statutory appeal has been W.P. (C) No. 14628 OF 2010. : 2 : preferred by the petitioner and the same is pending consideration of the first respondent. Ext.P10 is the order whereby the second respondent granted permission to revert the petitioner to the post of HSA. The petitioner has raised certain legal grounds in Ext.P11 which requires serious consideration by the first respondent. Reversion from the post of Headmistress to that of HSA is certainly a major penalty and therefore the matter requires serious consideration by the first respondent. Pending consideration of Ext.P11 statutory appeal the 3rd respondent is taking hasty action to implement Ext.P10 is the grievance of the petitioner. Though a stay petition was filed along with Ext.P11 appeal no order has been passed thereon, it is further submitted. 3. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to take up the stay petition, if filed along with Ext.P11 appeal, and to pass orders thereon within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. Till such an order is passed Ext.P10 shall not be implemented. However, this will not stand in the way of the first respondent to pass orders on Ext.P11 appeal itself within the said period. At any rate, Ext.P11 appeal shall be considered and disposed of by the first respondent, in W.P. (C) No. 14628 OF 2010. : 3 : accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge