IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 26TH OCTOBER 2006 / 4TH KARTHIKA 1928 WP(C).No. 27935 of 2006(A) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ----------------- GEETHA C.M., LECTURER IN COMPUTER ENGINEERING, GOVT. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, KALAMASSERY, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.V.AJITH NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CONVENOR, DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE & PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPT., GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. A.J. VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/10/2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER, J. ===================== W.P(C) No. 27935 OF 2006 ===================== Dated this the 26th day of October, 2006 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as a lecturer in Computer Engineering in Govt. Polytechnic College, Kalamassery. Her grievance is that she is not being considered for promotion to the post of Head of Section (Computer Engineering), though she is fully qualified. It is pointed out by the petitioner that the Departmental Promotion Committee is scheduled to meet on October 31, 2006. It is contended by her that unless a direction is issued to the Departmental Promotion Committee, the case of the petitioner is not likely to be taken up for consideration. The learned counsel further submits that petitioner has preferred Exts. P5 and P6 representations before respondents 1 and 2 respectively highlighting her grievances and also projecting her claim for promotion. 2. Petitioner has raised various contentions in support of her plea that she is eligible and entitled to be promoted. However, in view of the limited prayer made by the learned WPC 27935/2006 2 counsel for the petitioner at the Bar, I do not deem it necessary to deal with those contentions at this stage. It is submitted that petitioner will be satisfied if an appropriate direction is issued to respondents 1 and 2 to consider and pass orders on Exts. P5 and P6 representations without any further delay. 3. In the above facts and circumstances the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to consider and pass orders on Exts. P5 and P6 representations strictly on their merit and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Respondent No.1 and 2 shall make an endeavour to consider the claim of the petitioner in the next meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee itself, if there is no other legal or technical impediment. 4. Petitioner shall be afforded sufficient opportunity to be heard before any decision is taken on Ext. P5 and P6. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with a WPC 27935/2006 3 certified copy of this judgment before the respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE csl