ASHARANI Vs. DIRECTOR OF VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A vexing question arises in this case as to the interpretation of Note 2 to R. 3 (6) of the Kerala Vocational Higher Secondary Education State Service Rules, 2004, ("the rules" for short ). This Writ Petition is filed by a person included in the rank list prepared by the Public Service Commission for the post of vocational Higher Secondary School teacher (English), by direct recruitment. The appointment to the post of non Vocational Teachers is being made for the first time in the State. The petitioner's contention is that as per R. 3 (6) of the Rules, the only method of appointment prescribed is by transfer from the category of Non Vocational Teachers (Junior) in the concerned discipline in the subordinate service of the Department and in the absence of qualified hands under that category, by direct recruitment. Under Note 1, 10 per cent of the total posts of Non vocational Teachers in each discipline shall be reserved for appointment by transfer from qualified ministerial staff in the subordinate service of the Department. The petitioner submits that since the only method of appointment prescribed is by transfer in the category of Non Vocational Teachers (Junior), in their absence, the entire vacancies have to be filled up by direct recruitment. Alternatively, it is contended that even if 10 per cent are to be set apart for appointment by transfer from qualified ministerial staff, in the absence of qualified ministerial staff, the vacancies in the 10 per cent quota should also be filled up by direct recruitment. In this case the P. S. C. , along with the rank list for direct recruitment, simultaneously prepared a rank list for appointment to the 10 per cent posts reserved for by transfer appointment from qualified ministerial staff. Only three were found to be eligible in that category. Nine posts were available for such appointment. The balance vacancies should also be filled up from the rank list for direct recruitment is the contention raised by the petitioner. The petitioner alleges that respondents 4 to 9, who do not possess the prescribed qualifications, are continuing in service as Non Vocational Teachers in those six vacancies. The contention is that their services should be terminated and the said vacancies should also be filled up from the list prepared for direct recruitment, in which case, the petitioner would come within the zone of consideration as per his position in the rank list.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 4 and 5 appear and contest the matter. The learned Government pleader has filed a counter affidavit taking the contention that 10 per cent of the total posts of Non Vocational Teachers have to be reserved for appointment by transfer from qualified ministerial staff and those vacancies can be filled up only by transfer from qualified ministerial staff and not from the rank list prepared for direct recruitment. This contention is supported by respondents 4 and 5 also.

(3.) I have considered the rival contentions in detail.