FR ANTONY KAVALAKKATT Vs. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER ALUVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment in O.P. No. 6240 of 1998. First appellant is the Manager of St. Thomas High School, Malayattoor. Second appellant is a person, who applied for appointment in the School under the Dying in Harness Scheme. The second respondent is a person, who has also applied for a post under the Dying in Harness Scheme. The facts of the case are as follows:

(2.) A vacancy of clerk arose in the St. Thomas High School on 31.1.1998. Second petitioner / second appellant and second respondent submitted applications for appointment under the Dying in Harness Scheme. The second respondents father was a Teacher in the School, who passed away on 17.3.1987. The second appellants mother was a teacher in St. Marys L.P. School, Malayattoor, who passed away on 21.7.1991. Both the schools are under the management of the first appellant. Claims for appointment of second appellant and the second respondent were recognised by the management and consequently, both of them were called for interview. The Interview Board decided to appoint the second appellant in the vacancy of Clerk, which arose in the School on 31.1.1998.

(3.) Aggrieved by the above, the second respondent filed a complaint before the District Educational Officer. Since no action has been taken by the District Educational Officer, the second respondent approached this Court. This Court directed the District Educational Officer to consider and pass appropriate orders on the complaint of the second respondent, in accordance with law. The District Educational Officer passed Ext. P4 order dated 18.3.1998 and took the view that the second respondent, having the prescribed qualification of S.S.L.C. for the post of Clerk under R.2(1) of Chap.14A of Kerala Education Rules, is a better claimant under R.51B of Chap14A of the Kerala Education Rules for the post of Clerk which arose on 31.1.1998, due to retirement of a Clerk. The management was therefore directed to take appropriate action to give appointment to the rightful claimant. Thereafter the parties approached this Court. The learned single Judge dismissed the Original Petition. It is against that the present Writ Appeal is filed.