Kerala High Court
T.A.Rajamma vs The State Of Kerala
Author: K. Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/29TH POUSHA, 1937
WP(C).No. 2155 of 2016 (T)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
----------------------
T.A.RAJAMMA, AGED 58 YEARS
WIFE OF VISWANATHA KULIKAR
8/2163-A, KILIKAR ROAD, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI - 2
(HEADMISTRESS (RETIRED), T.D TTI, MATTANCHERRY)
BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
SRI.V.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT.
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPT., SECRETARIAT ANNEX
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
ERNAKULAM AT KAKKANAD - 682 030
4. THE PRESIDENT, PTA OF T.DHIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
MATTANCHERY, ERNAKULAM - 682 030
5. THE HEADMISTRESS, T.D HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
MATTANCHERRY, ERNAKULAM - 682 002
R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 2155 of 2016 (T)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL DATED
22.04.14
EXT.P2 COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B1/13614/12 DATED 10.03.15 OF THE
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION.
EXT.P3 COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 26.5.15 ALONG WITH
LIABILITY CERTIFICATE
EXT.P4 COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTION DATED 10.09.15
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
// TRUE COPY //
P.A TO JUDGE
SB
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
=====================
W.P.(C) No.2155 of 2016 - T
======================
Dated this the 19th day of January, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is aggrieved with the non-consideration of Ext.P4 appeal filed before the 2nd respondent. The appeal is filed on 10.09.2015.
2. In such circumstance, the 2nd respondent definitely will have to look at the appeal filed before it and consider the same in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations on merits, which the 2nd respondent will consider, in accordance with law.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN,
JUDGE
SB/19/ 01 /2016 // true copy //
P.A to Judge.