Court upheld the petitioner's right to promotion and benefits as Headmistress, directing timely resolution of delayed leave entitlements.

JUDGMENT Dated this the 19^th day of December, 2025 The petitioner states that she was the seniormost Teacher in Vimala Hridaya High School under the Neyyattinkara Educational District. Despite her qualification for promotion to the post of Headmistress, in the vacancy that had occurred in the School on and with effect from 01.06.2020, the 5^th respondent-Manager gave charge to another person. Consequently, the petitioner filed W.P.(C)

No.40718/2022 before this Court.

2. By Ext.P1 judgment dated 25.01.2024, this Court found the action of the Manager illegal and consequently, it was declared that the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Headmistress from 01.06.2020. This was challenged by the Manager in W.A. No.289/2024. However, the said Writ Appeal was dismissed and the 5^th respondent promoted the petitioner as Headmistress as per Ext.P3 from

01.06.2020.

3. Though by Ext.P4 order, the 4^th respondent found the petitioner eligible only for service and other benefits in the post of Headmistress from 04.03.2024, the 1^st respondent, in Ext.P5 letter held that the petitioner is entitled to all the benefits in the post of Headmistress from

01.06.2020.

4. Accordingly, she was granted the same, however, denying Terminal Surrender Leave for the period from 01.06.2020 to 31.05.2023 and that the period from 04.03.2024 to 31.05.2024 alone was reckoned, at 33 days, which as per Exts.P1 and P2 judgments of this Court and the direction, in Ext.P5 letter, issued by the Government should be for another 99 days more. The petitioner is claiming the Terminal Leave Surrender for the period from 01.06.2020 to

31.05.2023.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 4.

6. The petitioner would contend that Ext.P9 has been issued in gross violation of Exts.P1 and P2 judgments and Ext.P5 letter of the 1^st respondent. The 4^th respondent cannot pick and choose the Terminal Leave Surrender alone and maintain that the petitioner is eligible only for the period from 01.06.2023 to 31.05.2024, oblivious of the fact that she was granted all other benefits for the other period.

7. Be that as it may, from the pleadings, I find that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P10 representation before the 1^st respondent. In the interest of justice, it is necessary that the 1^st respondent considers the same and takes appropriate decision thereon in accordance with law expeditiously.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 1^st respondent to consider Ext.P10 and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of three months, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.