MUHAMMED FAYIZ O.P. ARABIC TEACHER, P.K.H.M. ALP SCHOOL Vs. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MANGADA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is impelled against the order of the learned single Judge, dated 10.04.2018, in R.P. No. 308 of 2018 in W.P.(C) No. 39577 of 2017. We must record at once that the judgment impugned is only the one passed by the learned single Judge in the review petition and not in the writ petition, because, according to the appellant, the original judgment in the writ petition was in his favour, while the modifications made to it through the judgment in the review petition affects him detrimentally.

(2.) To understand the compass of the appellant's grievance, we have gone through the facts of the case quite in detail. The appellant was appointed as a Primary School Teacher in a regular vacancy that arose in PKHMA L.P. school w.e.f 27.07.2015. When his appointment was sent up to the Educational Authority for approval, the 3rd respondent [Director of Public Instructions] directed the 1st respondent [Assistant Educational Officer] to consider the same as per law. The Assistant Educational Officer thus considered the application for approval and Ext. P5 order was issued, however, rejecting approval holding that the 5th respondent herein was already enjoying a preferential claim under Rule 51A of the KER. The order of the Assistant Educational Officer namely, Ext. P5, rejecting the appellant's approval for appointment says that the 5th respondent was appointed in a leave vacancy that arose in the school between 19.06.1998 and 17.12.1998 and, therefore, that such appointment would merit a claim under Rule 51A.

(3.) The appellant, in the writ petition, contended specifically that Ext. P5 order was untenable in law since the 5th respondent, after the amendment of the KER, would not be entitled to stake a claim under Rule 51A, in view of the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in Manager, V.K. N.M. Vocational Higher Secondary School v. State of Kerala [2016 (1) KLT 489 ]. We notice that the learned single Judge disposed of the writ petition by judgment, dated 22nd February, 2018, wherein, after considering the impact of the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in Manager, V.K. N.M. Vocational Higher Secondary School case [supra], it was recorded in the last line of the judgment thus; "since the 5th respondent was a person appointed for less that two months, he cannot be considered to be Rule 51A claimant in respect of vacancy which arose in 2015."