VIDYA. V. B. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by Ext.P6 rejection of approval to the appointment of the petitioner as HSST (Junior), the petitioner has preferred Ext.P8 Revision Petition before the 1st respondent. The petitioner submits that the delay in disposing of Ext.P8 Revision Petition will cause irreparable injury to the petitioner, as the petitioner is not likely to be paid salary applicable to the lower post also.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 6.

(3.) Taking into consideration the fact that Ext.P8 is a statutory Revision Petition, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P8 Revision Petition expeditiously.