MYRTLE MOTHIS Vs. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC ISTRUCTION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:

(2.) The petitioners are challenging the correctness of the seniority list of HSA's for the period from 1.1.1986 to 31.12.1990. It is stated that the name of the 4th respondent was improperly included in the Ext.P3 seniority list. According to the petitioners, the 4th respondent is junior to the petitioners. It is contended that the chance of promotion of the petitioners would be seriously affected, if the name of the 4th respondent is not removed from Ext.P3 seniority list. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the petitioners should have challenged the correctness of Ext.P3 seniority list by filing an appeal under Rule 38(2) of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules. However, as per the proviso to said rule the period for filing the appeal is one month. It is submitted that still the petitioners are entitled to invoke a jurisdiction under Rule 92 of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules and approach the Government in revision.

(3.) Since the petitioners have an effective alternate remedy, I do not think that the Writ Petition can be entertained at this stage. The Writ Petition is accordingly closed, leaving open the right of the petitioners to move the Government in accordance with law.