MARY GEORGE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who were qualified to be appointed as Lower Primary School Assistants (LPS As) were appointed in various leave vacancies by the 7th respondent in his school. The first petitioner was appointed on various dates as per Ext. P1, P2 and P3 orders. The above appointment was not approved by the 5th respondent as per Ext. P5 order. The appointment of the first petitioner as per Exts. P2 and P3 were rejected by the 6th respondent as per Ext. P6 and P7 orders. Ext. P8 is the order in appeal by the 4th respondent which confirmed Ext. P6.

(2.) The 2nd petitioner was appointed as per Ext. P9 order. The above appointment was not approved by the 6th respondent as per Ext. P10 order. Ext. P11 is the order in appeal by the 4th respondent, which confirmed Ext. P10. The revision filed by the 2nd petitioner against Ext. P11 was rejected by the 2nd respondent as per Ext. P12. The appointment of the 3rd petitioner as per Ext. P13 order was rejected by not granting approval by the 3rd respondent as per Ext. P14. Appeal filed against Ext. P14 was rejected as per Ext. P5 along with the appeal filed by the 1st petitioner.

(3.) Ext. P15 is the appointment order of the 4th petitioner. Approval was not granted by the 6th respondent to the above appointment as per Ext. P16 order. Ext. P17 is the order in appeal filed against Ext. P16 by the 4th respondent.