The entitlement of qualified individuals to preference in appointment to the post of Headmaster and the importance of appointing only qualified hands as Headmasters.

Viswanatha Iyer, J.

The two petitioners are the Manager and the Headmaster respectively of the Nava Mukunda High School, an aided school governed by the Kerala Education Act and the Rules (in short the Act and the rules ).

2. The post of Headmaster in the school fell vacant on April 1, 1979 consequent on the retirement of Sri.P.M. Sethumadhavan Nair from service.

3. Rule 44A of Chapter XIV-A of the Rules prescribes the minimum service qualification for appointment as Headmaster of a High School as twelve years of continuous graduate service with a pass in the test in the Kerala Education Act and the Kerala Education Rules, and in Account Test (Lower) conducted by the Kerala Public Service Commission. There was however an exemption in favour of persons who have completed the age of fifty years as also twenty five years of service. Sub rule (2) of the rule provided that if any teacher with the minimum service qualification was not available for appointment, the Manager may appoint any other qualified person selected through advertisement in papers, following the directions issued by the Director of Public Instruction from time to time. Sub rule (3) further provided that if no teacher with the qualifications was available in spite of compliance with the directions referred to in sub rule (2), the senior most graduate teacher on the staff of the school shall be put in charge for a period not exceeding one year at a time with the approval of the District Educational Officer.

4. The second petitioner was the senior most High School Assistant in the school at the time the vacancy of Headmaster arose on April 1,1979, but he did not possess the prescribed test qualifications for being appointed to the post; nor was he entitled to the exemption, as he would have completed twenty five years of service only on June 13,1980. None of the other teachers in the school was also qualified to be appointed as Headmaster at that time. The first petitioner Manager applied to Government for relaxation of sub-rules 2 and 3 of R.44A for appointing the second petitioner as teacher in charge for the period from April 1,1979 to June 14,1980. This was accorded by Government by the order Ext.Pl dated August 2,1979 subject to the condition that there Was no qualified or senior claimants under the management for appointment to the post of Headmaster. Evidently this order was passed in exercise of the powers conferred on Government by rule 3 of Chapter I of the Rules to dispense with or relax the requirement of any rule to such extent and subject to such conditions as they may consider necessary where Government was satisfied that the operation of any rule caused undue hardship in any particular case. The second petitioner was thus put in charge of the school, without following the procedure prescribed by sub rule (2), pursuant to the relaxation granted by the order Ext. Pl.

5. The third respondent was also a High School Assistant in the school, but he was not test qualified on April 1, 1979, when the vacancy arose. He appeared subsequently for the prescribed tests, and it is next in controversy, that he passed the tests and became qualified by October 18,1979. Scion after he appeared for the tests, in which he expected to pass, he wrote to the first petitioner Manager on September 13, 1979 intimating him about it and requesting that he may be appointed as the Headmaster on his becoming qualified. He also filed a writ petition O. P No. 3487 of 1979 in this court challenging the proceedings Ext.Pl relaxing the rules and permitting the second petitioner to be the teacher in charge of the school up to June 14, 1980. This original petition was disposed of only on June 11, 1980, just on the eve of expiry of the period during which the second petitioner was permitted to be teacher in charge. This court did not therefore go into the merits of the case. The original petition was disposed of with the observation that the period during which the second petitione