1. Poti, J., in dismissing Original Petition No. 5064 of 1971 understood R.51A in Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education R.1959 as not providing for preference in the matter of appointment to a teacher who had been appointed earlier in a temporary vacancy as against another who had also been appointed to a temporary vacancy but subsequently. The question is whether this interpretation of the rule is correct. We shall read the rule: "51A. Qualified teachers who are relieved as per R.49 or 52 or on account of termination of vacancies shall have preference for appointment to future vacancies in schools under the same Educational Agency provided they have not been appointed in permanent vacancies in schools under any other Educational Agency."

From the wording of the rule, it is clear that in terms it does not provide for any preference between two or more persons who may be entitled to the benefit of this rule as against what may be termed new applicants. It would not be proper to read more into this rule by looking at the note to R.5 in the same chapter. Nor can we determine the question with reference to what we consider fair or proper. It Would be proper no doubt to give