AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Viju Abraham, J
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to respondents 3 and 4 to grant grade promotion.
Though the petitioner completed 9 years of service and was entitled for the grade promotion, the same was denied by the 4th respondent stating that the said claim can be considered only after regularisation of break in service and after a proposal to that effect has been submitted by the Headmaster of the school. Thereupon the petitioner has preferred Ext.P6 representation to the District Education Officer(DEO) to grant grade promotion and seniority legitimately due to him, which was rejected by Ext.P7 order intimating that only after regularisation of the break in service, the claim for grade promotion can be considered. Aggrieved by Ext.P7 order of rejection, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P8 representation before the 3rd respondent, Deputy Director of Education(DDE).
Heard the learned Government Pleader also, who upon instructions submitted that the claim of the petitioner for grade promotion can be considered only after regularisation of the break in service and after a proposal to that effect is submitted by the Headmaster of the school.
After hearing both sides, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the 5th respondent and the Headmaster. The 3rd respondent shall take a final decision in the matter within an outer limit of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.