IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2010 / 4TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 23278 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.AMMINIAMMA, W/O.SASIDHARAN PILLAI, H.S.A (SANSKRIT), JAWAHAR H.S., EDAMULAKKAL P.O ANCHAL, KOLLAM, RESIDING AT SASI BHAVAN, ULIYANADU, KARICKOM P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL SRI.C.SINOY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THEVALLY, KOLLAM - 691 009. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE EDAMULAKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, (MANAGER, JAWAHAR H.S.AYUR), EDAMULAKKAL P.O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM. 4. SMT.G.SANTHA KUMARI, H.S.A., JAWAHAR H.S.AYUR P.O., KOLLAM. R1 & R2 BY G.P.SRI.DILIP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).23278 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 26th day of July, 20101 JUDGMENT The petitioner is presently working as High School Assistant (Sanskrit) in Jawahar High School, Ayur, which is one of the schools under the Edamulakkal Gramma Panchayat. Earlier, by virtue of her seniority, the petitioner was promoted as Headmistress of Jawahar High School as per Ext.P2. The said order of appointment was approved as per Ext.P3. The grievance of the petitioner is that subsequently as per Ext.P4, the second respondent cancelled the approval granted by the petitioner in the light of G.O(Ms.)No.62/2010/G.Edn. dated 26.4.2010. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred a statutory appeal before the first respondent on 18.6.2010. According to the petitioner, the aforesaid G.O. dated 26.4.2010 relied on by the second respondent for cancelling her approval of appointment is not at all applicable in the case of the petitioner. The petitioner has taken all such contentions in Ext.P5. That apart the petitioner has also raised the contention that Ext.P3 order of approval was cancelled without notice. W.P.(C).23278 of 2010 2 2. Since the petitioner has already preferred a statutory appeal as per Ext.P5 and the same is pending before the first respondent, I do not think it necessary to consider the merits of the contentions at this stage. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 appeal expeditiously, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to respondents 3 and 4. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. cms