Balakrishnan Nair, J.

The writ petitioner is the appellant. The respondents were the respondents in the Writ Petition. The point that arises for decision in this appeal is whether a Higher Secondary School Teacher (for short "H.S.S.T.") relieved on termination of vacancy is entitled to get re-appointment, when a vacancy arises in that cadre in future.

2. The brief facts of the case are the following: The appellant is a post-graduate in Sociology with 50% marks. She has acquired B.Ed. degree also. She is duly qualified for appointment as H.S.S.T in Sociology. By Ext.P3 order, she was appointed in a leave vacancy in the 2nd respondents School, for the period from 210.2000 to 33.2001 (5 months). She was selected by a duly constituted selection committee and her appointment as H.S.S.T (Part-time -now called Junior) by the Manager of Zamorins Higher Secondary School, Kozhikode was approved, in the time scale of pay of Rs.5500 - 9075, by the Director of Higher Secondary Education. On termination of that vacancy, she was retrenched. She was again appointed as H.S.S.T (Junior) in Sociology from 7.2003 to 31.2004 (7 months). The said appointment was also approved by the Director of Higher Secondary Education. While so, a vacancy arose in the School in the post of H.S.S.T (Sociology) from 16.1.2006, as a result of relief of Sri. R. Shylendra Varma, to join as Lecturer in Zamorins Guruvayurappan College. On coming to know of the vacancy, which arose on 16.1.2006, the appellant submitted Ext.P7 representation dated 18.1.2006, claiming that vacancy. She based her claim for re-appointment on Ext.P6 circular issued by the Director of Higher Secondary Education. The said circular, among other things, provides that when proposals by Managers for approval of appointments are forwarded to the Director of Higher Secondary Education, certain documents should accompany such proposals. The same includes a declaration by the Manager that there is no claimant under Rule 51A of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules (for short "the K.E.R.") awaiting for re-appointment. Notwithstanding the appellants representation, the Manager did not appoint her, instead, the appointment was delayed till the 3rd respondent acquired the qualification of State Eligibility Test (for short "S.E.T."). The said respondent cleared the test on 7.6.2006. The 3rd respondent was a High School Assistant (for short "H.S.A.") working in the High School wing of the Higher Secondary School. He was not having the S.E.T qualification and therefore, ineligible for appointment as H.S.S.T on the date of occurrence of the vacancy. So, the re-appointment of the appellant was delayed till he acquired the S.E.T qualification and finally, the 3rd respondent was appointed. Aggrieved by the denial of appointment to her, the appellant filed the Writ Petition, seeking appropriate directions to the management to appoint her as H.S.S.T (Sociology). She claimed employment, relying on Rule 51A of Chapter XIV A of the K.E.R. It is a rule providing for preference to retrenched hands in appointments to the vacancies arising in future.

3. The 2nd respondent Management filed a counter affidavit, stating that Rule 51A of Chapter XIV A of the K.E.R has no application to Higher Secondary School Teachers, the appointments of whom are governed by the provisions of Chapter XXXII of the K.E.R., framed under the Kerala Education Act, 1958. There is no provision similar to Rule 51A of Chapter XIV A in Chapter XXXII. It was also submitted that 25% of the vacancies of H.S.S.T has to be reserved to be filled up from the teachers of the High School Wing. The 3rd respondent was appointed in that quota. Such transferee appointees have a superior claim when compared to a retrenched hand. The 3rd respondent also filed a counter affidavit, raising similar contentions. According to him, Chapter XXXII is a complete code concerning appointment of teaching and non-teaching staff in aided Higher Secondary School