MOOSAKUTTY Vs. D E O WANDOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein was appointed as an Upper Primary School Assistant in an Aided School, by the Manager, in a promotion vacancy. Ext. P1 is the order of appointment. One Smt. Sreekala K. was promoted as High School Assistant which paved way for the petitioner's appointment as U.P.S.A. in the resultant vacancy. The school was upgraded as High School in the Academic year 2006-07. As regards the appointment of High School Assistants, pursuant to the judgment of this Court, in WP (C) No. 2067/2007, the Government passed Ext. P2 order according sanction of five posts of High School Assistants (core subjects) for the year 2006-07. Thereafter, by Ext. P3, the Government passed orders directing the District Educational Officer to take steps for the approval of appointed teachers. Accordingly, orders of approval were issued in respect of H.S.As'. But as regards the petitioner, the approval was rejected by Ext. P5, which is under challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) The core issue is whether, the reasons stated in Ext. P5 that, the Manager should have appointed a protected Teacher in the place of the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner submits that the Manager has executed an agreement in terms of R.6(viii) of Chap. V, KER. The copy of the agreement is produced as Ext. P6. The obligation of the Manager under the said agreement is to appoint a protected Teacher from the Educational Sub district. As far as Wandoor Educational District is concerned, there was no protected Teacher available and Ext. P7 is produced to show that no protected U.P.S.A. was available or was deployed to any other school.