JANNET VARGHESE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The seminal issues that arise for consideration in this Writ Petition are whether in the wake of Ext. P10 amendment effected to Rules43 and 51A of Chapter XIVA. a claimant under Rule 51A is to be preferred to the claimant under Rule 43 and further when two vacancies arise on the same day, one of which is the very same post, which was held by the claimant under Rule 51A and another, which is a lower post, whether the claimant under Rule 51A can claim the post which he held earlier. The bare facts necessary to appreciate the contentions are as follows:

(2.) Ext. P10 is an amendment to Rules 43 and 51A. By Ext. P10, in Rule 43 of Chapter XIVA for the words and the figures "Subject to Rules 44 and 45" the words and figures "Subject to Rules 44, 45 and 51 A" has been substituted. In Rule 51 A, again after the words "to future vacancies" the following words were inserted, namely, "in the same or higher or lower category of teaching posts, for which he is qualified, that may arise." Ext. P11 is the reply sent by the petitioner to Ext. P9. She filed Ext.P12 memorandum also.

(3.) The additional 5th respondent is a claimant under Rule 43. Reference is made to the decision reported in Suseela v. The Manager Sreenarayana Dharma Sangam School 1976 KLT 670, Babu v. Manager, S.N.V.H. School Paravur I.L.R. (1978) 2 Ker. 40) and in Catherine v. Manager, M.S. Mundoor 1985 KLT (SN) 34 P.23 : I.L.R. (1985) 2 Ker. 211 to buttress the contention that the claim under Rule 43 will prevail over Rule 51A. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the additional 5th respondent that it was not the intention of the Government to give a right to Rule 51A claimant over Rule 43 claimant. Reference is made to the explanatory note, which reads as follows: