MEENA T.S. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A High School Assistant in English in the Higher Secondary School and Vocational Higher School Brahmamangalam ('the School' for short) has filed this writ Petition challenging the appointment of the 5th respondent as HSST (Jr.) in English by direct recruitment and the orders Ext P7 and P14 by which her claim for appointment by transfer to that post was rejected by the respondents 3 and 1 respectively.

(2.) The School was upgraded as Higher Secondary School as per G.O.(Rt)No.4417/2013/G.Edn dated 23.10.2013. As per GO(MS) No.177/2014 G.Edn dated 04.09.2014 [Ext R4(a)], Government sanctioned 6 posts of HSST Junior (one each in English, Physics, Chemistry, Maths,Economics and Computer Application) and one post of HSST in Commerce. As per the provisions contained in Rule 4(3) of Chapter XXXII KER appointment to 25% of the posts of HSST junior are to be made by transfer from among qualified teachers in the School and 75% by direct recruitment. Therefore 2 out of the 7 posts were to be filled up by transfer provided there are qualified hands in the High School Primary School. The Manager issued Ext P2 notification dated 09.09.2014 inviting applications for appointments to all the posts of HSST Junior except Chemistry. After conducting a process of selection, the Manager appointed the 5th respondent as HSST Junior in English.

(3.) The petitioner has been working as HSA (English) in the 4th respondent's School from 02.06.2003 onwards. She was having the qualifications of BA English and B.Ed English. She appeared in the final examination of MA Degree in English from Madurai Kamaraj University in April 2014. The posts of HSST were sanctioned in the School on 04.09.2014, while she was awaiting the results of the examination. Her results were published on 17.09.2014. Manager had issued Ext.P2 notification on 09.09.2014. Petitioner submitted Ext.R4(d) application before the Manager on 20.09.2014 requesting to appoint her as HSST Junior in English stating that she passed the M.A. Degree examination and was the seniormost qualified hand to be appointed in the 25% quota. Thereafter she submitted Ext P3 representation before the respondents 2 and 3. It is stated that she submitted another representation on 01.10.2014 when she received the M.A. Degree certificate. Thereafter based on directions from this court in her W.P.(C) No. 26145 of 2014, 3 rd respondent considered her request and rejected the same as per Ext P7 order approving the action of the Manager stating that petitioner was not qualified as on the date of occurence of vacancy. Petitioner challenged the same before Government and Government upheld the order of the 3rd respondent. Writ Petition is filed challenging the same.