KERALA HIGH COURT
Ramachandran, J
Bhagavathi Ammal v. Sulaksha Rani and others
1Petitioner was appointed as a High School Assistant by the third respondent in a leave vacancy for the period from 1.9.1983 to 30.11.1983 (Ext. P1). That appointment was duly approved. She was appointed in the next year as Upper Primary School Assistant on 21.06.1984, consequent on the retirement of one Upper Primary School Assistant. That appointment was approved by Ext. P2 Order. The first respondent had approved service as High School Assistant in the School of the third respondent from 10.11.1982 to 283.983. She was appointed again from 5.9.1983 to 26.11.1983. She was, thereafter, appointed in a leave vacancy from 25.6.1984 to 30.8. 1984. The fourth respondent approved all the appointments. The second respondent was appointed as Upper Primary School Assistant in a leave vacancy from 6.1.1984 to 30.3.1984. She was regularly appointed as Upper Primary School Assistant in a permanent vacancy on 4.6.1984. Both those appointments were approved.
2It appears that an audit objection was raised against the appointment of the petitioner as Upper Primary School Assistant. She was not paid her salary since June, 1985. In the meantime, the first respondent had filed Ext. P3 petition dated 1
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.