Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Sarath Kumar.C.A vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala|21 November, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel 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, who joined the service in the school under the management of fifth respondent on 2.2.2012 as UPSA, had his services regularised prospectively. Later, his appointment was approved through Ext.P2 by the first respondent retrospectively. Despite Ext.P2 orders, the fourth respondent has not implemented the said order. Petitioner has thus approached this Court ventilating his grievance.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that pending the disposal of this writ petition, the fourth respondent has accorded approval, but so far no salary has been paid to the petitioner in terms of the said approval.
W.P(. C)No.27107 OF 2014 : 2 :
4. The learned Government Pleader, on instruction, has submitted that it is for the headmistress of the school to submit the necessary bills so that the fourth respondent can process them and ensure that the salary is paid to the petitioner in terms of Ext.P2 approval. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent, to his credit, has undertaken to communicate to the headmistress of the school to take necessary steps to prepare and submit the bills concerning the salary of the petitioner to the fourth respondent at the earliest.
5. In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader, and the learned counsel for the fifth respondent, this court disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the headmistress of the school to prepare and submit the necessary bills concerning the salary of the petitioner before the fourth respondent to enable the said authority to take further steps in this regard.
If required, the petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the headmistress to enable her to take necessary steps. Needless to observe that the entire process of the headmistress preparing the W.P(. C)No.27107 OF 2014 : 3 :
bills and submitting and later the fourth respondent taking appropriate decisions thereon shall be completed as expeditiously as possible.
jes Sd/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sarath Kumar.C.A vs State Of Kerala

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
21 November, 2014
Judges
  • Dama Seshadri Naidu
Advocates
  • Sri Alexander Joseph