(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was earlier working as UPST in the 5 th respondent school and she was promoted and appointed as HST(Maths) with effect from 01.06.2016. It is submitted that the approval for the appointment was rejected on the ground that the school is an uneconomic school and the petitioner's promotion cannot be approved. It is submitted that two other UPSTs of the same school who were working on deployment on protection were thereafter accommodated as HSTs on promotion and the said appointments have been approved. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is being a Rule 51A and Rule 43 claimant and the contention that the petitioner's appointment is in an uneconomic school cannot stand in the way of the approval of the appointment. The petitioner has also relied on a circular dated 20.08.2019, which specifies that the appointment made under Rule 51 A of Chapter XIVA KER even in uneconomic schools are liable to be approved on scale of pay basis. It is submitted that the said circular which is issued pursuant to a decision of this Court in Siji P. Jose v. State of Kerala [2012(1)KLT 867] has retrospective effect from 10.05.2012. It is therefore contended that the appointment of the petitioner as HST is liable to be approved from the date of such appointment i.e., 01.06.2016.