VILASINI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We are inclined to agree with the view expressed by the learned Single Judge that the fact that the sixth respondent in the O.P. (O.P.No.8196 of 1990) obtained permanent employment in Tamil Nadu does not affect her right to seek employment under R.51A of Chap.14A of the Kerala Education Rules. The proviso to R.51A relates to preferential right for future vacancies only if the claimants have not been appointed in permanent vacancies in schools under any other "Educational Agency". Under S.2(2) "Educational Agency" has been defined to mean any person or body of persons permitted to establish and maintain any private school under this Act. The learned Single Judge was, in our view, right in holding that inasmuch as the educational agency in Tamil Nadu is not an educational agency falling under S.2(2), the sixth respondent is not disentitled to have preferential right for employment under R.51A In our opinion, the proviso to R.51A is not attracted to the facts of this case, inasmuch as the sixth respondent was appointed in a permanent vacancy in a school not under the Educational Agency under the Kerala Act, but in a school established by some other agency in Tamil Nadu. It is however contended that the words "educational agency" have to be broadly interpreted in the context of R.51A and that the definition in S.2(2) should not be imported in the particular context. We are unable to agree. If the appellant's argument is accepted, a person appointed in some other State would be deprived of the preferential right under R.51A, even if such the person would like to come to the State of Kerala, and settle down here after exercising his or her preferential right under R.51A. In our view, the definition is squarely attracted to such a situation, and it cannot be said that there is anything in the context which requires the definition under S.2(2) not to be applied. The appeal fails, and is dismissed.