Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader 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, being the Manager of an aided school, promoted the senior most teacher as Headmaster in the vacancy which arose on 30.04.2014, when the incumbent retired. Based on what is said to be an objection of a junior teacher, the 2nd respondent refused through Ext.P3 order to grant approval. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed Ext.P4 statutory appeal before the 1st respondent, who is yet to consider it. Complaining of its non-disposal, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
W.P.(C.) No. 28366/2014 -2-
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 1st respondent to consider Ext.P4 statutory appeal of the petitioner in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to all concerned, including the said junior teacher on whose objection Ext.P3 came to be passed, and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No order as to costs.
sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE.
rv W.P.(C.) No. 28366/2014 -3-