The Petitioner who is the widow of a Peon who died while in service under the 4th respondent is challenging the denial of appointment to her by the 4th respondent and the order passed by the DEO saying that there is no vacancy to accommodate her, when the vacancy which occurred on the death of her husband continues to remain vacant without promoting the Full Time Menial (FTM) in the sanctioned post against that vacancy and appointing her against the consequential vacancy.

2. The question to be considered is whether a claimant under Rule 9A of Chapter XXIVA/Rule 51 B of chapter XIVA or an FTM who was appointed but not approved consequent to reduction of post is entitled to preference against the first vacancy which arises in the School.

3. The petitioner's husband died on 06.01.2016, while he was working as a Peon in the 4th respondent School. Petitioner aged 51 and 2 minor girl children aged 15 and 13 lost the only breadwinner of the family and are finding it difficult to survive. Petitioner submitted Ext.P4 application along with all the requisite documents before the 4th respondent on 14.01.2016. She thereafter approached the Educational Authorities also along with Ext.P7