(1.) These two writ petitions are based on same set of facts and give rise to same questions of law. They are therefore heard and disposed of by this common judgment. Parties and exhibits are referred to in this judgment as they are described and marked in WP(C) No.39300/2024, unless otherwise specified.
(2.) The petitioner joined service as HSA (Natural Science) in the School managed by the 4th respondent on 6/6/2001. The appointment was approved. Later, she was appointed as HSST (Sociology) by-transfer, on 15/7/2021 as per Ext.P1. The petitioner states that the 5 th respondent was appointed as UPST on 4/9/1993. She was promoted as HST (Social Science) only on 16/7/2007.
(3.) The 5th respondent objected to the appointment of the petitioner as HSST. Thereupon, the 3rd respondent-Deputy Director issued Ext.P3 order dtd. 29/10/2021 rejecting the claim of the 5th respondent, holding that the petitioner is senior in the category of HST. The 5th respondent challenged Ext.P3 order, before the Government. The Government passed Ext.P5 order dtd. 26/3/2022 rejecting the claim of the 5th respondent.