S CLARA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since there is inordinate delay in filing this appeal, we have perused the appeal papers to find out as to whether any purpose would be served in ordering notice to the respondents to consider the applications. While doing so, we notice that appellant has called in question the order dated 14.3.2006 passed in W.P. No. 16578/2005.

(2.) A perusal of the order would indicate that the learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition since liberty was sought to withdraw the writ petition further indicating that the appellant would approach the authorities concerned under the mandatory provisions under the Education Act and the Rules.

(3.) The appellant party in person would state that subsequent to the same, a review petition in R.P. No. 4/2007 was filed before the learned Single Judge. The order dated 12.1.2007 passed in the said review petition is made available to us. A perusal of the said order would indicate that the learned Single Judge has in fact noticed that the order does not call for review-since at the first instance the writ petition has been withdrawn by reserving liberty and no other ground was raised before the learned Single Judge to review the earlier order. In that view, we find no merits in this appeal. However, liberty as reserved by the learned Single Judge would enure to the benefit of the appellant to approach the competent authority under the provisions of the Education Act and putforth all contentions before the competent authority. At this stage we also take note of the contention of the party in-person that the authorities are not considering her grievance by issuing the appropriate form. Such grievance if put forth by the appellant shall also be considered objectively by the competent authority and the appropriate forms sought for by the appellant shall also be issued to the appellant in accordance with law. All contentions are left open to be urged before the competent authority.