4th respondent is a Corporate Management. It has many schools. In a la vacancy of Lower Division Clerk, in one of the schools belonging to the 4th respond Petitioner was appointed. That vacancy was between 7-1-1985 to 6-4-1985. Later will another leave vacancy arose in one of the schools run by the 4th respondent, petitioner appointed from 13-11-1985. Since the permanent incumbent expired during I vacancy,

petitioner was appointed in that regular vacancy with effect from 29-12-1i Above appointments were not approved by the District Educational Officers on ground that 4th respondent ought to have promoted two Peons who were fully quali and posted as Lower Division Clerks. 4th respondent took up the matter in ap I before the Deputy Director of Education and the Director of Public Instruction will success. Thereupon, petitioner and 4th respondent preferred revision petitions ui R.92 of Chap.X!V-A of Kerala Education Rules before Government. By Ext.PS of Government rejected both revision petitions. Hence this original petition.

2. Respondents 5 and 6 were working as Peons when the vacancies of L Division Clerks, to which petitioner was appointed, arose. Respondents Sand 61 ap