The court affirmed that appointment processes must align with established rules, ensuring adherence to judicial interpretations of educational staffing.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is working as a Higher Secondary School Teacher (Junior) [HSST(Jr)] in Mathematics, in the services of 'Desabandhu Higher Secondary School', Mannarkkad, has approached this Court being aggrieved by Exts.P8 and P11 orders issued by the Deputy Director of Education, Malappuram and the Government respectively, through which, her appointment with effect from 22.02.2014 has been denied approval, saying that same was illegal on account of the fact that a certain Sri.V.P.Jayarajan was, by then, eligible to have been made the Principal of the school. 2. The petitioner says that the stand of the Authorities in Exts.P8 and P11 is completely in dissonance with Chapter XXXII of the Kerala Education Rules ( KER for short) and that since Sri.V.P.Jayarajan was appointed as the Principal only on 23.05.2016, namely nearly two years after she was appointed, this could not have been cited as a reason to deny her approval. The petitioner, in substantiation of her plea, relies on Ext.P7 judgment of this Court, wherein, a learned Judge has found that when a Headmaster is promoted as the Principal and if there are Higher Secondary School Teachers available for all the subjects, then the Junior most among them will have to be construed as being supernumerary.

3. The petitioner says that this is what has exactly happened in the school because, when Sri.V.P.Jayarajan - who was handling the subject of Mathematics - was promoted as the Principal of the school on 23.05.2016, he was obligated to engage in teaching activities; but that this would not mean that she would become redundant or rendered surplus, because, going by Ext.P7 judgment, her post would have had to be deemed to be supernumerary. She alleges that Exts.P8 and P11 orders did not even consider these aspects and have been issued in total violation of the declarations of law by this Court in Ext.P7 judgment. She, therefore, prays that Exts.P8 and P11 be set aside.

4. I have heard Sri.Paulson Thomas – learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.P.M.Manoj – learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.

5. Sri.P.M.Manoj – learned Senior Government Pleader, in support of Exts.P8 and P11, submitted that if one examines the facts of this case closely, it would be rendered without doubt that the whole situation arose because Sri.V.P.Jayarajan was not given his eligible promotion from the date on which he became entitled for it. He submitted that Sri.V.P.Jayarajan became qualified to be promoted as the Principal on 03.04.2012 and that he had made a request to the Manager to promote him to such post on 01.08.2012. He showed me that, had Sri.V.P.Jayarajan been appointed by the Manager on that date, since he was obligated to take 16 periods in Mathematics, appointment of the petitioner would have been unnecessary and impermissible. He submitted that, however, it was only because Sri.V.P.Jayarajan was denied promotion with effect from the date of his eligibility or the date of his application, that the Manager was in a position to appoint the petitioner and thereby create an additional burden. He, therefore, prayed that Exts.P8 and P11 be not interdicted.

6. It is obvious from the afore submissions of the learned Senior Government Pleader that he, as is also the case of the Authorities in Exts.P8 and P11, proceeds on the basis of several surmises and conjunctures. What he really says is that, had Sri.V.P.Jayarajan been promoted as the Principal, either in the year 2012 or any day before the petitioner was appointed on 22.02.2014, then her appointment would have become a surplus.

7. However, even going by Exts.P8 and P11, it is clear that there were disputes with respect to the post of Principal in the school and matters had even reached this Court, through W.P(C)No.6590/2014. Sri.V.P.Jayarajan was not considered for promotion as the Principal and he had, therefore, sought declaration that he is so eligible, which finally ended in a judgment and subseq