Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 28793
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. V. JAYAKUMAR, J
SHEEBA P – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 15876 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: J.JULIAN XAVIER,FIROZ K.ROBIN,ROY JOSEPH,AKHIL P.C.,ASWATHY SUSAN PAUL
For the Respondents: SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE
Court directs disposal of revision petition against promotion denial within two months.
Headnote:The petitioner challenged orders denying promotion to Headmistress post relying on G.O.(M.S.)No.28/2010/G.EDN and related GOs, claiming inapplicability per prior judgment (Ext.P6) and G.O.(RT)/730/2017/G.EDN. Court found pending revision (Ext.P13) unaddressed. Issues framed as quashing promotion orders and directing consideration of revision. Court directed Government to dispose revision within two months; deferred regular appointment till then.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's prayers challenge promotion orders and seek revision consideration. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. direction to dispose revision within two months and defer appointment. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:
“i. Call for the records connected with the case leading to Exhibits P3 and P9 issued by the respondents 4 and 3 respectively and quash the original of Exhibits P3 and P9 by issuing a writ of Certiorari.
ii. Declare that Exhibit P5 G.O relied on by the 4th respondent Manager as well as Exhibits P10 and P11 GOs relied on by the 3rd respondent are inapplicable in the case of the petitioner in the light of the declaration of the law by this Hon’ble Court in Exhibit P6 judgment as well as Exhibit P12 GO issued by the 1st respondent in an identical case.
iii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P13 revision within a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court and till such time direct the 4th respondent to defer from making regular appointment to the post of Headmistress in Sree Krishna High School, Mattathur.”
2. The principal grievance highlighted by the petitioner is that the petitioner has filed Ext.P13 revision petition before the Government. Ext.P13 revision petition has not been considered by the Government.
3. Heard.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances, there will be a direction to the competent authority of the Government to consider and pass appropriate orders on the revision petition within a period of two months from the date of issuance of this judgment.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
