IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2011 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 34036 of 2010(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- RAJINI K.S., TRAINED LABOURER, GRAFTING SECTION, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.K.ANAND, SRI.M.V.SASIDHARAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MAIN CAMPUS, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 654, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MAIN CAMPUS, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 654. R1 & R2 BY SRI.K.P.MUJEEB, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 34036 of 2010-D - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of March, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioner herein claims that she has been working in the Grafting section of the University from 1995 till 2007. The petitioner made a request to the University to absorb her on a permanent basis. As the University is not taking any steps to consider the representation, this writ petition has been filed. It is the case of the petitioner that as per the direction issued in Ext.P3 judgment of this Court, similar employees have been granted certain benefits. 2. In the statement filed on behalf of the respondents, it is pointed out that the claim of the petitioner that she was working in the Grafting section of the University is not correct, in the absence of any valid documents to that effect. It is also stated that the petitioner has not produced any experience certificate, which according to her, will establish the fact that she has been working in any of the University section. It is further pointed out that the University has no section known as Grafting section. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Ext.P2 representation is still pending and therefore the University may be directed wpc 34036/2010 2 to take a decision after verifying the documents produced. 4. Therefore, there will be a direction to the University to take a decision on Ext.P2 with notice to her, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after going through the various materials relied upon by the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/