BINDU T. M. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Headmistress of the School managed by the 5th respondent, has filed the writ petition to set aside Exts.P2 and P3 and to declare that Ext.P1 appointment of the petitioner as HM from 1/6/2020 is legal, valid and sustainable.

(2.) The petitioner states that she being the seniormost fully qualified Rule 43 claimant, was appointed as Headmistress from 1/6/2020 onwards against a retirement vacancy. By Ext.P2 order dtd. 23/3/2021, the District Educational Officer declined approval to the appointment of the petitioner stating that the appointment was made overlooking the seniority of the 6th respondent.

(3.) The Manager preferred an appeal before the Deputy Director pointing out that disciplinary proceedings are pending against the 6th respondent. The Deputy Director, as per Ext.P3 order dtd. 31/3/2022 rejected the appeal filed by the Manager. The petitioner states that the Manager has filed Ext.P4 revision appeal against Ext.P3.