Radhakrishnan, J.

The point in controversy is whether Ext.R2(a) letter dated 25.11.1989 given by the petitioner relinquishing the post of Headmaster is a permanent relinquishment within the meaning of Rule 44(1) of Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules.

2. The headmaster of an aided L.P. school had availed of leave from 25.11.1989 to 09.02.1990. Petitioner and others in the school were not qualified to be promoted to the post of headmaster. One Kesava Pillai was the only eligible person to be appointed to the post of headmaster since he had completed 50 years of age. Petitioner had neither acquired the test qualification; nor had she completed 50 years of age at that time and hence she could not be appointed as headmaster. However, Manager had obtained relinquishment letters from all the teachers including the petitioner even though petitioner could not have aspired for that post at that time. Later the post of headmaster became vacant on 30.6.1990 and therefore Kesava Pillai was appointed on a regular basis as headmaster from 01.07.1990 and he retired from service on superannuation on 31.05.1993. By that time petitioner had completed 50 years of age as on 14.05.199