G. ANANDAVALLY AMMA Vs. STATE OF KERALA,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE grievance voiced by the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that the second respondent did not consider the petitioner for promotion to the cadre of Heads of Departmental High Schools/AE Os'/TTIs' and equated categories. It is stated that the reason for non consideration was that in the confidential report relating to the petitioner for the period from 1.1.2009 to 31.12.2009, the endorsements were found in different types of ink. One of the reliefs sought for by the petitioner in the Writ Petition is to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the second respondent to include petitioner's name in Exhibit P3 promotion list at the appropriate place and to post the petitioner in the promoted post.

(2.) THE learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that Adhoc Departmental Promotion Committee was convened on 4.8.2010. The name of the petitioner was also considered for promotion and her name was also included in the select list. It is also submitted by the learned Government Pleader that promotion of the petitioner will be made in due course. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that if the name of the petitioner is not placed in the appropriate place in the promotion list, her seniority would be affected. It is made clear that in such a contingency, the petitioner would be free to make representation to the Director of Public Instruction and the same will be considered by the Director of Public Instruction.