IMPORTANT POINTS
Whether Rule 51B is applicable to claims based on the death of an employee, prior to introduction of the rule was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Manager, Parli High School v. Narayanan [2002 (3) KLT 912]. After considering the provision, it was held that even though Rule 51B operates only prospectively, the fact that the death of the employee occurred before the introduction of the rule does not disentitle the dependants from claiming appointment under that Rule. It was held that if the occurrence of vacancy is on or after the coming into force of Rule 51B, the fact that the employee died before such commencement is immaterial.

JUDGMENT :

V.G. ARUN, J.

1. Writ Appeal No.890 of 2019 arises out of W.P.(C) No.41013 of 2017, filed by the Manager of the Thachinganadam Higher Secondary School. W.A.No.1015 of 2019 arises out of W.P.(C) No.31221 of 2018 filed by three teachers; Suneer K.P, Renu P.P and Deepa P, appointed as HSA (Maths) in the School on 23.6.2014, 13.10.2014 and 28.10.2016 respectively. In W.P.(c) No. 41013 of 2017, the Manager challenged Ext.P13 order by which the Government upheld Rule 51B claim of Hema V. Nair; the 5th respondent therein, and directed to appoint her in the next arising vacancy of HSA (Maths). The Government further directed to approve the appointment of Rajasree S.Varrier, who was appointed as HSA (Maths) immediately before Suneer K.P; the first petitioner in W.P.(C) No.31221 of 2018. In W.P.(C) No.31221 of 2018, the teachers challenged Ext.P8 Order by which the Government rejected the request for approval of their appointments, on the premise that their approval would depend upon the outcome of W.P.(C) No.41013 of 2017. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge dismissed both writ petitions and directed the Manager to appoint Hema V.Nair in the next arising vacancy of HSA (Maths).

2. At the outset, we take note of the fact that the Manager as well as the teachers have filed only one writ appeal against the common judgment in two writ petitions. In spite of this fatal defect, we decided to consider the writ appeals on merit since approval of appointment of the teachers is at stake.

3. The facts necessary for rendering a decision on merits are narrated hereunder, with reference to the Exhibits in W.P(c) No. 41013 of 2017:

4. Viswanathan Nair; father of Hema V. Nair, died in harness on 5.11.1983 while working as HSA (Maths) in the School. Since Hema V. Nair was aged only 9 years at that time, her date of birth being 21.10.1974, and since Rule 51B was introduced in the KER only on 30.3.1990, no claim for compassionate appointment could be preferred by her at that point of time. Hema V. Nair obtained B.Ed Degree in April, 1998 and raised a claim for compassionate appointment as HSA, by preferring an application on 9.11.1998. Her claim for compassionate appointment under Rule 51B of Chapter XIVA was rejected by the District Educational Officer (DEO) on the ground that the claim was belated. The DEO observed that since the Government order which was prevalent at the time of submission of application for compassionate appointment was G.O.(P) No.34/87/P&ARD dated 17.12.1987, wherein the time limit for application was prescribed as two years from the date of death of the Government servant and, in the case of minors,three years from the date of attaining majority, Hema V. Nair ought to have filed the application on or before 21.10.1995. Hema V.Nair having attained majority on 21.10.1992 and that the first application filed only on 9.11.1998, it was held that the claim lacks legal validity and the Manager is not bound to appoint Hema V.Nair in his School as HSA (Maths) under Rule 51B. Hema V. Nair challenged the rejection before the Government in revision and the Government, as per Ext.P2 order, upheld her claim, finding that the relevant Rule was G.O.(P) No.12/99/P&ARD dated 24.5.1999, which prescribed a time limit of three years from attaining majority for submission of application for compassionate appointment. The Government took note of the fact that even though the claimant had attained majority on 21.10.1992 and had to submit the application within 21.10.1995, Rule 51B of Chapter XIVA was stayed immediately after its introduction on 30.3.1990 and continued to be stayed till 16.1.1997. It was therefore held that the application submitted by Hema V.Nair on 9.11.1998 could be treated to have been filed within time. Hence, the DEO, who was then officiating as Manager of the School, was directed to take immediate steps to honour the application dated 9.11.1998 submitted by Hema V.Nair. Ext.P2 was challenged by three teachers,