IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH JANUARY 2010 / 16TH POUSHA 1931 RP.No. 1075 of 2009(T) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.21587/2002 Dated 17/07/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER ------------------------------------------------- K.K.MALLIKA, W/O. T.K.BHASKARAN, JEEJA BHAVAN, AYYANTHOSE, THRISSUR (RETIRED HEADMISTRESS) S.N.GIRLS HIGH SCHOOLS KANIMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.P.SAMUEL SRI.B.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCTIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR. 3. THE MANAGER, SREE NARAYAN BOYS AND GIRLS SCHOOLS KANIMANGALAM THRISSUR DIST. 4. SRI. SIVARAMAN, H/S LATE UNNIBHAMINI CHANASSERY HOUSE, SAW MILL ROAD, KOORKANCHERY THRISSUR. R1 & R2 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.MANU. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P.1075/2009 in O.P.21587/2002-T = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 6th day of January, 2010. O R D E R This application for review is filed by the writ petitioner. By the judgment sought to be reviewed, it was held, among other things, that the petitioner shall have all retiral benefits fixed in terms of the declaration contained in that judgment, but will not have any claim for pay and allowances. The declaration was that she was entitled to be appointed as Headmaster in the vacancy that arose on 1.6.1996. The fact remains that at a later point of time, i.e., from 1.4.1997 to 30.6.2000, she was actually promoted as the Headmistress in another school under the same management. She also worked as such. Obviously, therefore, she RP1075/09 -: 2 :- cannot be deprived of any part of the pay and allowances for that tenure, i.e., from 1.4.1997 to 30.6.2000. The judgment sought to be reviewed was not intended to take away any such right of the petitioner. It is so clarified and this review petition is allowed to that extent. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/0601