(1.) The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the principal secretary of the school education department of the State Government dated April 29th , 2005 rejecting her request for transferring her to a school of her choice.
(2.) Facts of the case are these. The petitioner took the examination conducted by the State School Service Commission. She secured a place In the panel of selected candidates. On November 30th, 2001 the commission recommended her name. In terms of the recommendation the school authority offered her an appointment. On January 28th, 2002 she sent a representation to the commission requesting it to recommend her for a school close to her residence She mentioned that she was suffering from various ailments. The commission did not respond, She joined the school in February 2002. From June 2002 she stopped attending it. She did not give any intimation to the school authority or to the controlling department. In 2003 she moved this Court by taking out a writ petition (WP No. 1203 of 2003). By order dated January 6th, 2005 that writ petition was disposed of directing the secretary of the school education department of the State Government to consider her case, if a representation was filed by her. She filed a representation, and by the impugned decision the principal secretary expressed his inability to give any relief.
(3.) Counsel submits that at the time of recommendation the commission did not follow the provisions in rule 9 of the relevant rules casting an obligation on it to recommend the selected candidates according to their area wise preference, and hence the authority should not have turned down the petitioner's request for transferring her to a school close to her residence.