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, a Urdu Language Teacher, was appointed on 01.06.2011 in the Upper Primary School under the management of the fourth respondent. When Exhibit P1 staff fixation order was issued for the academic year 2011-2012 by the third respondent on 28.07.2011, the Full Time post of Urdu Teacher was converted to that of Part Time Teacher owing to the denial of the benefit of Group C posts diversion. In that context, a statutory appeal was filed by the Manager against Exhibit WPC 32493/14 2 P1 staff fixation order, but the same was rejected through Exhibit P2 order. Aggrieved thereby, the Manager is said to have submitted Exhibit P3 statutory revision before the first respondent. Seeking its disposal, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
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 respondent to consider Exhibit P3 statutory revision of the petitioner in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereof, 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