SANJEEVAN Vs. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are preferred against the judgment in o. P. No. 78 of 1999. W. A. No. 2462 of 1999 is preferred by the petitioner in the writ Petition, and W. A. No. 2532 of 1999 is preferred by the sixth respondent in the Writ Petition, the Manager of the School.

(2.) MANAGER of Sree Narayana Teachers Training Institute appointed the appellant as a Training School Assistant with effect from 2. 6. 1997 in a retirement vacancy of one Sankara Pillai. Management sought approval of the appointment. District Educational Officer vide his order dated 1. 8. 1997 rejected the same stating that claim of the fifth respondent, pushpalatha under R. 43 of Chap. XIV-A of the KER was not considered while effecting appointment. Order also stated that no classes were functioning in the Teachers' Training Institute and the MANAGER had not produced the declaration as prescribed in G. O. (Ms) No. 259/90/g. Edn. dated 15. 12. 90. Aggrieved by the said order, MANAGER preferred appeal before the Deputy director of Education, who rejected the same by order dated 22. 4. 1998. Later manager preferred a revision before the Director of Public Instruction, who vide his order dated 14. 12. 1998 dismissed the revision. Aggrieved by those orders, Writ Petition was preferred. Learned Single Judge did not interfere with the orders passed by the educational authorities. Aggrieved by the same, these appeals are preferred.

(3.) COUNSEL for the appellants contended that Sree narayana AUP School and Sree Narayana Teachers Training Institute are independent entities and consequently, fifth respondent cannot claim any right under R. 43 so as to get appointment in the Institute as TSA. Senior counsel, sri. K. Chandrasekharan, appearing for the appellants referred to decisions of this Court in Luciamma v. State of Kerala, 1990 (1) KLT 86; K. Padminikutty v. D. E. O. , 1996 (1) KLJ 368 and P. G. Madhavan v. P. K. Santhakumari Amma, 1994 (2)KLJ 370. COUNSEL also referred to various provisions of the Kerala Education rules to contend that Teachers' Training Institute and School are different entities. COUNSEL appearing for the contesting respondents Sri. M. Sasindran on the other hand contended that as per R. 3 of Chap. XXV of the Rules, every training school shall have a Primary School up to and including std. VII attached to it as demonstration school, and consequently, both the schools have to be treated as a one single unit.