1. These two cases have been filed by the very same petitioner to enforce his right under R.51B of Chap.XIVA of the K.E.R. So, they are heard and disposed of by a common judgment.

2. O.P. No.14830/99-M

The petitioner's mother Smt. S.Christi Bai was working as H.S.A. (Malayalam) in the school managed by the 2nd respondent from 3.8.1970 onwards. She died on 18.5.1989 while in service. At the time of her death, she had completed 19 years of service. The petitioner's date of birth is 30.5.1978 and at the time of his mother's death, he was only a minor aged about 11 years. He attained majority on 30.5.1996. Thereafter, on 30.11.1998, the petitioner submitted an application for appointment under R.51B of Chap.XIVA of the K.E.R. on finding that a vacancy of Peon has arisen in the school on 30.9.1998. Ext.P1 is the application submitted by him in the prescribed format. Thereafter, he moved the Director of Public Instructions seeking appropriate reliefs. Still later, he also submitted Ext.P2 representation dated 3.4.1999 before the District Educational Officer praying that appropriate directions may be issued to the Manager to consider his application. R.51B in Chap.XIVA of the K.E.R. was introduced as early as on 30.3.1990. However, because of the objections raised by the Managers of various aided schools, the Government, by an executive order, kept in abeyance the said amendment. Thereafter, as per the direction of this Court in O.P. No.664/95, the Government decided to enforce R.51B of Chap.XIVA of the K.E.R. Ext.P3 is the order issued by the Government in this regard. The petitioner, feeling aggrieved by the inaction of the Manager, the District Educational Officer and the Director of Public Instructions, filed this Original Petition seeking appropriate reliefs. He sought for a writ of mandamus against the respondents to appoint him as Peon. He also sought stay of filling up the vacancy of Peon which arose on 30.9.1998 by another candidate other than him.

3. The 2nd respondent Manager has filed a counter affidavit in the Original Petition. In the said counter affidavit, it is submitted that he has received Ext.P1 application. It is also stated that by Ext.R2(b), he has rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that Ext.P3 order has only prospective effect and the dependents of employees dying in harness on or after 30.3.1990 alone are eligible for employment assistance. The Manager has also produced Ext.R2(c) communication of the Government to the Headmaster of an aided school, which states that Ext.P4 has got only prospective effect.

4. O.P. No.8968/02-P

During the pendency of O.P. No.14830/99, this Original Petition was filed. The Manager filled up the vacancy of Peon which arose on 30.9.1998 by promoting the additional 6th respondent Mr. Sasikumar, who was a Full Time Menial. In the resultant vacancy of Full Time Menial, the 5th respondent Mr. R.Anilkumar was appointed, but the said appointment was not approved by the District Educational Officer, the Deputy Director and the Director of Public Instructions. Therefore, the 5th respondent filed a revision before the Government on 22.01.2001 claiming approval of his appointment. The Government, by Ext.P5 order, directed approval of appointment of the 5th respondent as Full Time Menial on the ground that the petitioner did not claim that post. This Original Petition is filed challenging Ext.P5 and seeking consequential reliefs.

5. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit supporting the impugned order. The 4th respondent Manager has also filed a counter affidavit. The Manager is denying the pleading of the petitioner that he has submitted an application for appointment to the vacancy of Peon that arose on 30.9.1998. It is also submitted that the petitioner is not eligible to get appointment in terms of the scheme. Since the petitioner's mother was a teacher, it is submitted that he cannot claim a post on the ministerial side. It is further submitted that since