K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.

The two Writ Appeals arise from the judgment in WP (C) No.21682/04 filed by the first respondent in W.A.No.2181/05 and the 8th respondent in W.A.No.1917/05. She will be described as 'the writ petitioner' in this judgment. W.A.No.1917/05 is filed by the 5th respondent in that Writ Petition, who Was selected and appointed to the post of Laboratory Assistant in the Higher Secondary School managed by the appellant in W.A. N6.2181/05. The appellants are aggrieved by the direction contained in the impugned judgment, whereby the learned single Judge had directed the Writ Petitioner to be accommodated against the post of Laboratory Assistant. The petitioner in WP(C).No.31635/05 is also a candidate selected to that post. The fact frame of the cases for the purpose of disposal of these cases are as follows:

2. The husband-of the Writ petitioner was working as a UP School Assistant in the aided school managed by the appellant in W.A.No.2181/05, here-in-after referred to as the Manager. The school later got sanctioned higher secondary standards. Therefore, it was renamed as Higher Secondary School. The writ petitioner's husband died on 14.2.2001. R.51B Chapter XIV-A KER governing the conditions of service of aided school teachers provided for employment assistance to the dependent of teachers dying in harness in tune with scheme vogue in government service.

3. The writ petitioner presented Ext.B1 application claiming appointment on its basis. She Preferred appointment to the category of Clerk, Laboratory Assistant, Peon or Full Time Menial. According to the manager he offered her appointment as a Full Time Menial when a vacancy arose. This was not accepted by the writ petitioner. Later vacancies of Laboratory Assistant arose in the Higher Secondary Section of the School. Seventy five per cent of the vacancies has to be filled up by direct recruitment. It was notified. The writ petitioner also applied. Respondents No.6 to 8 in the Writ Petition including the appellant in W.A.1917/05 and the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.31635/05 were selected. At that time the writ petitioner approached this court claiming one of the vacancies of Laboratory Assistants. It resulted in Ext.P5 judgment. A learned single Judge, of this court directed consideration of her claim, which was pending at that time, before the Director of Higher Secondary Education and the District Educational Officer concerned. In compliance of the direction contained in Ext.P5, the Director of Higher Secondary Education, the controlling officer in respect of Higher Secondary Section passed Ext.P6 order to the effect that the claim regarding employment assistance by the dependents of a deceased High School Teacher or U.P. School, Teacher, as the case may be, had to be considered by the Director of Public Instruction and accordingly turned down her request, in Ext.P6. The District Educational Officer, the controlling Officer in respect of the High School Section in Ext.P16 turned down the claim of the writ petitioner stating that claim for appointment to the post of Laboratory Assistant in Higher Secondary Section had to be considered by the Director of Higher Secondary Education. Faced with this situation the writ petitioner approached for a second time with O.P.No.21682/04, which led to the impugned judgment.

4. In the meantime the Writ Petitioner had noticed that the 9th respondent in the O.P had been appointed as a Full Time Menial overlooking her claim, when her claim' was being staked by filing Ext.P1. Therefore she had, in addition to challenging Ext.P6 and Ext.P16 also claimed in the Writ Petition appointment in preference to the 9th respondent who had been appointed by the manager against the vacancy of Full Time Menial which had arisen on 31.5.2001.

5. The learned single Judge, considered the case and -found that the manager was statutorily bound to give one of the three vacancies of Lab Assistants to the Writ Petitioner. It was also found that the c