Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3, 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 is said to have got approved service as Upper Primary School Assistant in the school under the management of the fourth respondent from 02.06.2008 in terms of Exhibit P1. In course of time, the approved service of the fifth respondent was modified through Exhibit P3. As a consequence, the third respondent issued Exhibit P5 order accommodating the fifth respondent in the place of the petitioner, in turn, placing the petitioner in a vacancy of a teacher, who availed herself of leave without allowance.
WPC 32912/14 2
3. As a matter of subsequent development, the incumbent teacher, who went on leave without allowance, re-joined duty, thereby displacing the petitioner. Contending that the petitioner came to know about Exhibit P5 only when she was displaced, she filed Exhibit P9 revision before the first respondent. Seeking its expeditious disposal, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
4. When it is pointed out that Exhibit P5 order was passed in 2012, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that at no point of time has the petitioner been communicated about the order, leave alone hearing her before passing the order. The learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner has taken a plea in that regard in the writ petition.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that since the fifth respondent's appointment has been approved with effect from 2007 and given the fact that the petitioner was appointed in 2008 in a different vacancy, there is no impediment for the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioner in Exhibit P9 revision positively.
WPC 32912/14 3
6. Be that as it may, since a statutory revision is pending before the first respondent, it is not appropriate for this Court to adjudicate the issue on merits.
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 expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Exhibit P2 revision of the petitioner, in accordance with law 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.
Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge tkv