Judgment : This Writ Petition has been filed praying for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the third respondent to grant approval of the petitioner's appointment as P.G. Assistant (Tamil) in S.C.M.S. Hr.Sec.School, Satchiyapuram, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District with all consequential benefits. The short facts, in a nutshell, are as follows :- 2. On account of a vacancy caused in the fourth respondent institution, the petitioner came to be appointed as P.G.Assistant in Tamil. Questioning her appointment, Writ Petitions in W.P. (MD).Nos.18218 of 1998 and 33297 of 2003, were instituted by one N.S. Grace Ester Rani. The said Writ Petitions were disposed of, by this Court, on 19.04.2004. In one of the Writ Petitions, a direction was issued to the respondents therein to consider the representation of the said N.S.Grace Ester Rani. However, the appointment of the petitioner was not set aside and it seems that she continued to be working in that school without salary. In the meanwhile, the diocese management had chosen to transfer the petitioner to CSI Girls Hr.Sec.School in a retirement vacancy, that had arisen in the said school. Since the approval for the transfer was not forthcoming, the Management left with no other option, but chose to appoint the petitioner afresh, in the said post. The petitioner continued to work in the said school, till 31.01.2008. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the period of four years of service put by the petitioner at Satchiyapuram, Virudhunagar District, has not been regularised or approved by the department, due to the pendency of the Writ Petitions in W.P.(MD).No.18218 of 1998 and 33279 of 2003, filed by the said N.S.Grach Ester Rani. Hence, the petitioner has come up with this Writ Petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the school authorities, namely, the fourth respondent herein, has already sent the proposal to the third respondent, who in turn, directed the school authorities to rectify certain errors. After rectifying the same, a recommendation was sent to the second respondent for passing necessary orders. Accordingly, the papers were once again forwarded to the third respondent. Thereafter, nothing has been acted upon by the respondents, insptie of the fact that the W.P.(MD).No.18218 of 1998 and 33279 of 2003, filed by the said N.S.Grach Ester Rani, were disposed of, as early as in the year 2004 itself. Accordingly, the papers were once again forwarded to the third respondent. Thereafter, nothing has been acted upon by the respondents, insptie of the fact that the W.P.(MD).No.18218 of 1998 and 33279 of 2003, filed by the said N.S.Grach Ester Rani, were disposed of, as early as in the year 2004 itself. Now, the petitioner has been left with at lurch. 5. The learned Government Advocate submitted that if the error pointed out by the respondents is rectified and a report submitted to the third respondent, there cannot be any impediment for the third respondent to forward the same for appropriate action. 6. In view of the above, the third respondent is directed to send the proposal to the second respondent, who in turn, is directed to pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, for regularising / approving the service of the petitioner and granting all the monetary benefits, as applicable to the petitioner. The said exercise is to be carried out within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.