IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 16TH AUGUST 2007 / 25TH SRAVANA 1929 WP(C).No. 24821 of 2007(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- S.P.RAJASHREE, W/O. RAMAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 36 YEARS, LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, KURUMATHUR SOUTH U.P.SCHOOL, P.O.KURUMATHUR-670 142, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM-14. 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TALIPARAMBA NORTH, P.O.TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. THE MANAGER, LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, KURUMATHUR SOUTH U.P.SCHOOL, P.O.KURUMATHUR, PIN-670 142, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 24821 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of August, 2007. J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims that she was appointed as Lower Primary School Assistant in the school under the management of respondent No.4 with effect from June 5, 2002 against an additional vacancy. The appointment was approved with effect from June 2, 2003 to July 14, 2005. The primary grievance of the petitioner is that approval ought to have been granted with effect from the date of appointment itself. 2. It is the further case of the petitioner that she was reappointed in the school with effect from June 12, 2006. But approval was declined on the ground that there was a ban on appointment. 3. Anyhow, I do not propose to deal with any of the above contentions raised by the petitioner at this stage in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner at the Bar. He submits that the Manager has preferred Ext.P4 revision petition before the Government against the order passed by the Controlling Officer and the petitioner has also preferred Ext.P5 revision against the said order before the revisional authority. The limited prayer is to issue an appropriate direction to respondent No.1 to take a decision on Exts.P4 and P5 expeditiously. 4. In the above facts and circumstances the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and pass orders on Exts.P4 and P5 strictly on their merit and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to mention that the petitioner and the Manager shall be afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before any orders are passed by respondent No.1. Petitioner shall produce a certified copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before respondent No.1 for compliance. A.K. Basheer Judge. an.