JUSNA ASHRAF Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner says that she was appointed as a High School Teacher in English in the Calicut Girls Higher Secondary School, Kozhikode, in a leave vacancy for two spells from 01.08.2011 to 31.12.2014 and from 16.09.2015 to 31.12.2017; both spells being approved with effect from 01.08.2011 to 21.12.2014 and from 16.09.2015 to 31.12.2017 respectively. She says that though she was again appointed to a leave vacancy from 01.01.2018 to 31.12.2022, a regular vacancy arose from 04.02.2019 and she was shifted to the said vacancy.

(2.) The petitioner says that, however, the 4 th respondent has now rejected her appointment in the leave substitute vacancy from 01.01.2018 as also in the regular vacancy from 04.02.2019, solely saying that since the appointments of two other teachers were ordered to be approved from 2008, giving them the benefit of the deeming provision that the Manager has executed a bond as per G.O.(P)No.10/10/G.Edn dated 12.01.2010; that the vacancy to which she has been appointed could have filled only by protected teachers.

(3.) The petitioner contends that since she is enjoying a statutory right under Rule 51A of the KER, her approval to the appointment could not have been rejected for the reason that protected teachers had to be appointed in her place. The petitioner relies on a judgment of this Court in Latha v. State of Kerala [2017 (3) KLT 84], a copy of which has also been produced on record as Ext.P11; and thus prays that Exts.P6, P6(a) and P7 orders be set aside and the respondents be directed to approve her appointment in the leave vacancy with effect from 01.01.2018 and in the regular vacancy from 04.02.2019, at the earliest.