IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2010 / 29TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 22485 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SUMA.V.G., JUNIOR PUBLIC HEALTH NURSE GRADE-II, FAMILY WELFARE CENTRE, CHAKKITTAPARA P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR SMT.N.N.PRASEEDA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH, KOZHIKODE-1. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22485 OF 2010 (I) ===================== Dated this the 20th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was advised and appointed as Junior Public Health Nurse Grade II. Subsequently, PSC cancelled the advise resulting in an order terminating the service of the petitioner. This proceedings were challenged before this Court in OP No.14875/01 resulting in Ext.P4 judgment directing reconsideration of the matter. That judgment was confirmed in WA No.700/06 filed by the petitioner. PSC reconsidered the matter and passed Ext.P6 order upholding the cancellation of advise. It is in these circumstances, Ext.P8 representation has been filed by the petitioner before the 1st respondent. 2. In Ext.P8 representation, the petitioner mainly relies on Ext.P7, where, according to the petitioner, the Government interfered with the cancellation of the advice in respect of similarly situated persons, invoking its power under Rule 39 of Part I KS & SSR. In this writ petition, what the petitioner seeks is an expeditious consideration of Ext.P8 in the light of Ext.P7 order. WPC No. 22485/10 :2 : 3. Having regard to the above facts, I dispose of this writ petition directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P8 with notice to the petitioner and in the light of Ext.P7 order. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 3 months of production of a copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile, status quo as on date shall be maintained. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp