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, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself. 2. The petitioner's mother, who was working as Lower Primary School Assistant in the School under the management of the first respondent, died in harness on 17.02.1991, leaving behind the petitioner as her legal heir and successor. Though the petitioner was by then 17 years old, she is said to have made an application in 1992 to the first respondent to provide her compassionate appointment. Nothing seems to have been heard about the said application, a copy of which, however, has not been filed before this Court. Later on 17.01.2000, the petitioner filed Exhibit P3 application renewing the request to provide employment to her on compassionate grounds. As could be seen from the record, Exhibit P3 representation, sent by registered post, was acknowledged by first respondent management. Once again, however, there seems to be no response from the management. Eventually, the petitioner submitted another representation in Exhibit P5 on 01.09.2014. Indisputably now the petitioner is 38 years old and is still staking her claim to a post in the first respondent School under the quota of compassionate appointment.
3. In the above factual background, the learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously contended that the petitioner is 51 B claimant and as such her right to a suitable post in the first respondent School is indefeasible, given the mandatory nature of the provision, namely Rule 51 B of Chapter XIV A of KER. In this regard the learned counsel has also placed reliance on Unnikrishnan v.
Manager, C.A.H.S. [2010 (1) KLT 354].
4. The learned Government Pleader has submitted that essentially it is the first respondent management which has to take a decision on Exhibit P5 or any other representation said to have been submitted by the petitioner.
5. Though the petitioner has been persisting with the claim to have employment in the first respondent School under the scheme of compassionate appointment for the past many years, it will suffice if the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent management to consider the case of the petitioner under Rule 51 B of Chapter XIV A of KER.
6. In the facts and circumstances, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider Exhibit P5 representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, especially taking into account the ratio laid down in Unnikrishnan (supra) 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 this judgment. To facilitate early disposal of Exhibit P5, the petitioner is directed to place a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of the judgment thereof before the first respondent.
With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.
DMR/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE