P P RAGHAVAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point for determination in this writ appeal relates to the interpretation of R.45 of Chap.14A of the Kerala Education Rules. The contest is between the appellant and the 6th respondent relating to their respective claims for appointment as the Headmaster of a complete Upper Primary School.

(2.) The requisite qualification for appointment as an Upper Primary School Assistant as provided for in R.3 of Chap.31 of the KER is a pass in SSLC Examination or its equivalent and TTC Examination conducted by the Commissioner for Government Examinations, Kerala or the other alternative qualifications mentioned therein. Both the appellant and the 6th respondent were appointed as U. P. School Assistants in the Ramaguru U. P. School, Puzhathi represented by its Manager, the 5th respondent in the appeal. Both the teachers had the SSLC and TTC qualification at the time of their appointment as Assistants in the school. The appellant was appointed on 4-9-1958 as U. P. School Assistant. He passed the B. A. Degree Examination held in April, 1974 and also passed the B. Ed. Examination in June, 1978. The 6th respondent was appointed in the school as U. P. School Assistant on 7-7-1959. He passed the B.A. Degree Examination in April, 1969 and also passed the B. Ed. Examination in June, 1973.

(3.) The post of Headmaster of the school fell vacant on 1-4-1979. The Manager apparently on the basis of seniority appointed the appellant as Headmaster on 2-4-1979. The appointment was approved by the Assistant Educational Officer overruling the objections of the 6th respondent as par his proceedings Ext. P1 dated 16-6-1979. In appeal by the 6th respondent the District Educational Officer by his proceedings Ext. P2 dated 28-11-1979 excelled the approval of appointment of the appellant and directed the Manager to appoint the 6th respondent as Headmaster of the school. In further revision by the appellant to the Director of Public Instruction, Kerala under R.8A of Chap.14A of the KER Ext. P2 decision of the DEO was set aside and the AEO was directed to approve the appointment of the appellant as Headmaster with effect from 2-4-1979. Ext. P3 dated 16-5-1980 is a copy of the order of the Director. The 6th respondent thereupon filed OP No. 1942 of 1980 before this Court and a learned single Judge following the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Akkarishetly v. Manager, S. R. A. U. P. School ( ILR 1978 (2) Ker. 14 ) allowed the original petition and restored Ext. P2 order of the DEO setting aside Ext. P3 order of the Director. It is against this decision of the learned Single Judge that the appellant has filed this writ appeal.