Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH, J
BINDHU S S – Appellant
Versus
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. approval rejection based on document issues and pwd reservation. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. pending revisions affect the approval process. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. importance of timely consideration in legal decisions. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. order for consideration of the revision petition. (Para 8) |
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 6th day of February, 2026 The petitioner being the seniormost Rule 51A claimant was appointed as UPST in a substantive vacancy arisen on promotion of incumbent as HST (English) on 09.10.2023. The approval sought for was rejected on account of non-production of certain documents and on the ground of reservation for PwD by Ext.P2.
2. The petitioner as well as the Corporate Manager filed Exts.P3 and P4 appeals respectively, before the 3rd respondent which is pending consideration for months together. She is working without salary since her date of appointment. The Government, by Ext.P6 Circular, frowned upon the practice of rejecting the approval sought for on the ground of PwD reservation and on flimsy grounds. The reservation for PwD was scrupulously complied with and the defects enumerated in Ext.P2 were cured by producing the documents before the Appellate Auth
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
