The subject ratio prescribed by the Director of Public Instruction should be followed in appointing teachers, and the retention of a teacher based on protection should not jeopardize the subjectwise requirement of teachers.

K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.

There were nine posts of High School Assistants during the year 1997-98 in the aided school managed by the third respondent. The subjectwise distribution of these posts were, three for Social Science, three for Mathematics and three for General Science. Among the General Science teachers, there were two physical Science teachers and one Natural Science teacher. During the next year viz. 1998-99, because of reduction in number of pupils, one division in Standard X was reduced. Only 8 class divisions were sanctioned for the High School Section with 8 posts of High School Assistants. Then going by the circular issued by the Director of Public Instruction under R.1(i) of Chapter XIVA K.E.R.,prescribing the subject ratio, subjectwise distribution of the teachers shall be, two for Social Studies, three for Mathematics, two for Physical Science and one for Natural Science. One among the Physical Science teachers proceeded on leave for five years. That vacancy was filled up by appointing the petitioner on 1.6.1998. The petitioner is a Physical Science graduate with B.Ed. There were two posts for that subject, but there was only one incumbent when the other proceeded on leave. At the same time, because of the reduction in the total number of posts of High School Assistants, one Social Science teacher had become excess. The Social Science teacher was entitled to be protected in terms of G.O. (P) 286/98/G.Edn. dated 21.7 1998, Ext. P4, taking into account the teacher-pupil ratio of 1:40.

2. The petitioners' appointment was declined to be approved by the District Educational Officer on the ground that an excess Social Studies teacher had already been protected in terms of Ext. P4. Therefore the petitioner, a Physical Science teacher shall not be entitled to get approval. Appeal and revision also failed. The revisional order is Ext. P10 produced in the amended Original Petition.

3. Ext. P4 cannot obliterate the circulars regarding subject ratio prescribed by the Director of Public Instruction taking into account the curricula of studies. The Director of Public Instruction had issued circulars prescribing subject ratio on 1:1:1 among the said three subjects and providing an internal ratio of 3:2, within General Science, between Physical Science and Natural Science. Three posts of General Science teachers were sanctioned in the year in question, viz., 1998-99, out of which two were for Physical Science and the other for Natural Science. During that year one among the two Physical Science teachers proceeded on leave reducing the teacher strength in that subject to one. To be in tune with the subject ratio, the vacancy caused due to the leave of the Physical Science teacher ought to have been filled up with a teacher eligible to hold that post. The petitioner is duly qualified. In such circumstance retention of a Social Science teacher on the basis of Ext. P4 shall not stand in the way of approval of appointment of a Physical Science teacher which is in tune with the subject ratio as well as staff fixation order. Protection is a concession to the retrenchment teacher, without jeopardising the subjectwise requirement of teachers on the basis of curricula of studies. Consequently orders including Ext. P10, declining approval to the appointment of the petitioner are bad and are quashed. Accordingly there shall be direction to the third respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner against the leave vacancy. The Original Petition is disposed of as above.