VIJAYALAKSHMI P. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the seniormost H.S.A in the 6th respondent's school, has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P3 Government Order and Ext.P7 order passed by the D.E.O rejecting approval to her appointment as Headmistress.

(2.) A vacancy of Headmaster arose in the 6th respondent's school from 1.4.2017 consequent to the retirement of the then incumbent. The Manager appointed the petitioner as Headmaster as per Ext.P4 order dated 1.4.2017. Ext.P1 seniority list would show that the petitioner is Sl.No.3 in the seniority list of H.S.As as on 1.1.2013. The 5th respondent is Sl.No.13. He is the seniormost test qualified hand among the H.S.As. As against the appointment of the petitioner, the 5th respondent raised objections. As per Ext.P7 order, the D.E.O rejected the proposal for approval of appointment of the petitioner stating that the 5th respondent is the qualified hand with departmental test qualifications and as per Ext.P3 order - G.O(Ms). No.157/2015/G.Edn. dated 10.06.2015 he is the qualified hand eligible for appointment and exemption need not be given to the petitioner when there are test qualified hands as provided in the said Government Order. The petitioner has filed this writ petition in the above circumstances. The petitioner also points out that she has subsequently acquired qualification in the year 2017.

(3.) The 5th respondent has filed an elaborate counter affidavit pointing out that the petitioner cannot be granted exemption and for appointment as Headmistress pass in Account Test (Lower) as well as the Kerala Education Act and Rules are absolutely necessary considering the nature of duties of the Headmaster. The learned counsel Sri P.V.Mohanan submits that the Division Bench judgment which considered the question regarding extension available to the teacher's appointment as Headmaster has not considered the Full Bench judgments on the point.