Balakrishnan Nair, J

Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge in WP (C) No.23049 of 2007, the appellants who were respondents 1 to 3 in that writ petition have preferred this writ appeal. The brief facts of the case are the following.

2. Respondents 1 and 2 herein have filed the above writ petition. They have approached this Court challenging Exts.P1 and P2 orders of the District Educational Officer(DEO), Thrissur. A vacancy arose in the school of the 3rd respondent in the post of Peon on 01.10.03 as a result of the retirement of the existing Peon on 30.09.03. The 2nd respondent who was working as FTM was clamouring for promotion, but, because of the dispute regarding management and the orders of the Government restraining the Manager from making appointment, he was not promoted. Finally, the Manager by order dated 25.10.06, promoted the 1st respondent as Peon. In the resultant vacancy, the manager appointed the 2nd respondent as FTM on 08.11.2006. The DEO rejected the approval of appointment of the 1st respondent by Ext.P1, on the ground that the incumbent holding the post of Manager at the relevant time, though he was permitted by the Government to functio