Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J
B. SREEDEVI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the procedural status and authority of various educational positions were established. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. the implications of subsequent vacating vs. established claims were highlighted. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. determination of applicant eligibility considering seniority and retrenchment status was essential. (Para 6 , 7 , 10 , 15) |
| 4. the ruling concluded with the dismissal of the petition based on legal standings. (Para 8 , 11 , 14 , 16) |
| 5. rejection of claims based on other claimants’ previous service was upheld. (Para 9 , 12 , 13) |
J U D G M E N T
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The 7th respondent is the Manager of three Schools, the Koorikuzhi AMUP School, the Aided Upper Primary School, Pallikkal and the Janakeeya Vidyalayam, Machadu. The petitioner is working as UPSA in AUPS, Pallikkal. The petitioner seeks to set aside Exts.P3 and P7 to P9 and to declare that the petitioner is entitled to get appointment covered by Ext.P2 approval.
2. The petitioner was appointed as UPSA on
02.06.2014 in AMUP School, Koorikuzhi, as per Ext.P1. The petitioner was appointed against an anticipated post of UPSA on granting independent charge to the Headmaster. For want of established post, the appointmen
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
