Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
NEHEEDA P.U. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appointment approval granted but periods notional. (Para 1) |
| 2. direct revision disposal with hearing within three months. (Para 2) |
Dated this the 1st day of April, 2026 JUDGMENT Though approval of appointment to the petitioner was granted as per Ext.P9, certain periods were treated as notional. Aggrieved by the same, Ext.P12 Revision Petition has been preferred by the petitioner before the 1st respondent and she seeks for an expeditious disposal of the same.
2. Heard the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.
After hearing both sides, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P12 Revision Petition submitted by the petitioner after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. A decision in this regard shall be taken within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
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
