Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing 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 was initially appointed as an Upper Primary School Assistant in the 5th respondent school from 1.6.2005 to 13.7.2009, which was approved by the respondent authorities through Ext.P1 till 31.3.2009, instead of 13.7.2009. It appears that the petitioner's appointment was in a promotion vacancy. Later the petitioner's second term from 1.6.2007 to 5.6.2009 was also approved by the authorities through Ext.P2. In the third phase, the petitioner was appointed from 6.6.2009 to 5.6.2014 and the said appointment was also approved by the authorities through Ext.P3. Subsequently, when the 4th respondent issued Ext.P5 staff fixation order, the petitioner was retrenched with effect from W.P.(C)No.29266 OF 2014 : 2 :
15.7.2014. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed Ext.P6 statutory revision before the second respondent. Complaining of its non consideration, petitioner filed the present writ petition.
3. The learned Government Pleader has submitted that though the petitioner was initially appointed in a leave vacancy, subsequent to 5.6.2014, the 5th respondent manager did not reappoint the petitioner. Owning to the inaction of the manager, the fourth respondent was constrained to retrench the services of the petitioner through Ext.P5, notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner is a Rule 51A claimant.
4. Be that as it may, since Ext.P6 statutory revision is pending before the second respondent, this Court is not inclined to advert to the merits of the matter. It will suffice, if a direction is given to the authority concerned to consider Ext.P6 in accordance with law.
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 second respondent to consider Ext.P6 revision filed by the petitioner in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard in W.P.(C)No.29266 OF 2014 : 3 :
person to the 5th respondent Manager as well as the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
jes DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE