Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner, a High School Assistant (Physical Science), working in the 5th respondent school, initially entered into service on 07.01.1985. With a continued approved service as UPSA, the petitioner came to be appointed as HSA in a leave vacancy from 15.11.1989 to 12.02.1990. Later, the said period was extended till 04.06.1990 against a promotion vacancy. Eventually, the petitioner's appointment as HSA was approved with effect from 20.06.1991 in a retirement vacancy.
W.P.(C) No.25288 of 2014
2
3. In a provisional list of seniority prepared by the 5th respondent, the petitioner was shown at Sl.No.2, whereas the 6th respondent was shown at Sl.No.1. Assailing the denial of seniority, the petitioner filed a representation before the 4th respondent, who in turn issued Ext.P3 order declaring that the 6th respondent is senior to the petitioner. Further aggrieved, the petitioner filed Ext.P4 appeal before the 3rd respondent under Rule 38(2) Chapter XIVA of KER. Complaining of its non-disposal, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
4. The learned Government Pleader has submitted that since the 3rd respondent has actively been seized of the issue, there is no need to have any adjudication on merits at this juncture.
5. In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, this Court, without adverting to the merits of the matter, disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the 3rd respondent to W.P.(C) No.25288 of 2014
3
consider Ext.P4 appeal in accordance with law and pass appropriate order thereon, as expeditious as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to observe, if any of the parties to the proceedings seeks an opportunity of being heard in person, the 3rd respondent shall consider the same.
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE
sj