K. Narayana Kurup, J.

One Smt. Gangakumari was appointed as U.P.S.A. in M.H.S. for boys from 25.1.1995 to 31.3.1995 in an existing division vacancy and the appointment was also approved by the Manager as also by the District Educational Officer as borne out by Ext. P2 appointment order. Thereafter, the said teacher was re-appointed from 5.8.1995 onwards as borne out by Ext. P3 appointment order. She possesses B.Sc. degree (Natural science) and B.Ed, qualifications and hence duly qualified for the post of H.S.A. (Natural science). Later, when a leave vacancy of H.S.A. (Natural science) arose, the Manager appointed one Rajasree to the said post rejecting Gangakumari's claim for the said post on the ground that she had as per Ext. P4 relinquishment letter, permanently relinquished her right for promotion as H.S.A. Ext. P7 is the representation preferred by Gangakumari to the District Educational Officer highlighting her grievances. In Ext. P7, Gangakumari has stated that the permanent relinquishment obtained from her is one obtained by force and therefore it is illegal and invalid.

2. As per Ext. P8, the District Educational Officer, informed Gangakumari that she had permanently relinquished her claim as H.S.A. and it has been accepted by the controlling officer and that an employee shall not be allowed to withdraw the relinquishment of the claim once accepted and approved by the controlling officer. Aggrieved by Ext. P8, Gangakumari moved this Court in O.P. 646/98 which was finally heard and disposed of by Ext. P9 judgment dated 1.6.1998 directing her to seek the alternate statutory remedy available under R.92 of Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules. Pursuant to Ext. P9 judgment, the Government, after hearing all the affected parties, passed Ext. Pll order dated 23.7.1998 holding that Ext. P4 relinquishment letter submitted by Gangakumari on 25.1.1995 is invalid. It is also held that the action of the Manager in having obtained relinquishment letter at the time of appointment was ultravires the provisions of the Kerala Education Rules. Aggrieved by Ext. PI 1, both the Manager and the teacher who was appointed as H.S.A. (Natural science) moved this Court in O.P. Nos. 15040/98 and 16707/98 respectively which were heard and disposed of by a common judgment dated 15.12.1998 by a learned Single Judge upholding Ext. PI 1 and declaring that Ext. P4 reqlinquishment letter has no statutory basis and the same has to be ignored. The judgment of the learned Single Judge is under challenge in these two Writ Appeals. W.A. No. 435/99 is at the instance of the Manager and W.A.No. 311/99 is at the instance of the teacher, Rajasree. The sequence of events which are mentioned in the statement of facts in this judgment and exhibits referred to herein are in the order as mentioned in O.P. 15040/98 preferred by the Manager.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and the respondents at length, we are of the considered opinion that the judgment under challenge rendered by the learned Single Judge does not call for any interference and the same is only to be upheld. The bone of contention is whether Ext. P4 relinquishment letter is liable to be acted upon while considering the claim of Gangakumari for the post of H.S.A. (Natural science). According to the learned counsel for the appellants, viz., the Manager and the teacher- Rajasree, who stands appointed to the post of H.S.A. (Natural science). Gangakumari having unconditionally relinquished her right for promotion as H.S.A., she is barred from staking a claim to the said post. We cannot accept this contention for more than one reason. First of all, it has to be noted that there is no provision either under-the Kerala Education Act or under the Rules framed thereunder permitting a teacher to relinquish promotion to any post or enabling the Manager to accept such a letter of relinquishment. R.38 of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules under which Ext. P4 relinquish