Reena Mathew Vs. State of Kerala

Reena Mathew vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 29, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1013369

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1013369
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice B.P.Ray
Decided On: Jan 29, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Reena Mathew

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....of this hon'ble court in wp(c)no.4045/2006-f dated 10 02/2006 p12 copy of the g.o.(rt)no.3278/06/ge of the government dated 29 07/2006 p13 copy of the g.o(rt)no.1017/2004/g.edn of the government dated 09 03/2004 p14 copy of the order no.d6.2059/2003 of the dist. collector, palakkad dated 11 10/2004 respondent's exhibits: nil /true copy/ p.a.to.judge sts b.p. ray, j.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - w.p.(c) no. 528 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - dated this the 29th day of january, 2013. judgment heard both sides.2. the petitioner is a rule 51-a claimant. the grievance of the petitioner is that due to the inaction on the part of the department, the petitioner got re-appointment only belatedly. hence this writ petition with the following prayers 1. call for the records relating to exts.p9 and p12 and quash the originals of the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order. 2.issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to grant service and monetary benefits to the petitioner as upper primary school assistant from 01.07.2004 onwards. in my considered view, the petitioner having accepted the appointment, cannot challenge the same. accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. sd/- b.p. ray, judge. rv w.p.(c) no. -:2:-

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.P.RAY TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 9TH MAGHA 193 WP(C).No. 528 of 2007 (K) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- REENA MATHEW,W/O. BENNY K. JOSEPH, AGED 3 YEARS, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, SARVAJANA HIGH SCHOOL, PUTHUCODE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM -14.

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD.

4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD.

5. THE HEADMISTRESS, SARVAJANA HIGH SCHOOL, PUTHUCODE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.528/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE HEADMASTER DATED 28 07/2004 P2 COPY OF THE LETTER OF -DO- DATED 27 09/2004 P3 COPY OF THE -DO- -DO- DATED 06 10/2004 P4 COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)NO.33/2005 DATED 11 01/2005 P5 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B4/29055/2005 OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION DATED 15 02/2005 P6 COPY OF THE ORDER OF APPOINTMENT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 01 03/2005 P7 COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27 07/2005 P8 COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)NO.26694/2005-C DATED 08 09/2005 P9 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EM5-77177/05/DPI/D.DIS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 21 11/2005 P10 COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DATED 21 12/2005 P11 COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)NO.4045/2006-F DATED 10 02/2006 P12 COPY OF THE G.O.(RT)NO.3278/06/GE OF THE GOVERNMENT DATED 29 07/2006 P13 COPY OF THE G.O(RT)NO.1017/2004/G.EDN OF THE GOVERNMENT DATED 09 03/2004 P14 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D6.2059/2003 OF THE DIST. COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD DATED 11 10/2004 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts B.P. RAY, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 528 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of January, 2013. JUDGMENT Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner is a Rule 51-A claimant. The grievance of the petitioner is that due to the inaction on the part of the Department, the petitioner got re-appointment only belatedly. Hence this writ petition with the following prayers 1. Call for the records relating to Exts.P9 and P12 and quash the originals of the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order. 2.Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to grant service and monetary benefits to the petitioner as Upper Primary School Assistant from 01.07.2004 onwards. In my considered view, the petitioner having accepted the appointment, cannot challenge the same. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE. rv W.P.(C) No. -:2:-

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2013 Same Parties Reena Mathew vs State of Kerala Same Subject Education Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice B.P.Ray