Balakrishnan Nair, J.

The petitioner was appointed as a Cook in a leave vacancy in the 4th respondent’s school on 10.7.2003. It is a special school meant for visually challenged children. On termination of the vacancy, he was relieved from service on 30.11.2003. The said appointment was approved by the District Educational Officer (D.E.O.). The petitioner submits that, thus he became a rule 51A claimant for future vacancices that may arise in the said school.

2. Later, a vacancy arose in the post of Scavenger on 7.2005. The petitioner was not appointed in that vacancy. Still later, another vacancy arose in the post of Cook on 6.2006. Even then, he was not considered for appointment. Claiming the vacancy in the post of Scavenger, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 representation before the Manager on 19.2005. It was followed by Ext.P3 representation dated 10.2005 filed, before the D.E.O. Since the said officer did not take any action, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 representation dated 17.5.2006 before the Director of Public Instruction. Since those representations were not considered, he filed Ext.P5 representation dated 20.7.2006 before the Government. But, the Government