Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners 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. The petitioners, Higher Secondary School Teachers (Junior), having their service approved with effect from 16.12.2011, are said to have been denied the benefit of vacation salary for the year 2012. Their claim for the vacation salary was rejected by the authorities through Exhibits P1-P3 orders. Aggrieved thereby, contending that several other similarly placed teachers have been extended the benefit, the three petitioners have filed Exhibits P8-P10 revisions respectively before the first respondent. Complaining of their non-disposal, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.
W.P.(c) No. 30944 of 2014 2
3. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners has made strenuous efforts to address the issue on merits, the learned Government Pleader has submitted that since statutory revisions are pending, it will suffice if a direction is given for their expeditious disposal.
4. In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, this Court, without adverting to the merits of the matter, disposes of the present writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Exhibits P8-P10 revisions of the three petitioners respectively in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.
DMR/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE