Compassionate appointment claims must be promptly recognized, focusing on a candidate's legitimate rights based on qualifications and financial necessity, disregarding later-acquired disqualifications.

P.M. MANOJ, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

WP(C) No. 32427 of 2018 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 19^th day of November, 2025

JUDGMENT

The writ petition is preferred for approval of the 1st petitioner's appointment as Office Attendant(OA)/Peon at the school managed by the 2^nd petitioner, and to declare that the 6^th respondent is not qualified for that position.

2. A vacancy for the post of OA/Peon arose on 30.11.2012 due to retirement. The 1^st petitioner was appointed to the said vacancy on 12.06.2012. However, her appointment was not approved because the 2^nd petitioner had not considered the claim of the 6^th respondent, as a 51B claimant. Subsequently, the 1^st petitioner and two other teachers filed a Writ Petition seeking expeditious disposal of the revision preferred by the 2^nd petitioner herein. That proceeding resulted in Ext.P3 order, whereby the Government directed the 2^nd petitioner to appoint the 6^th respondent, a 51B claimant, in the next arising vacancy in the School, provided she was otherwise eligible.

3. In this context, it is contended by the petitioner that the 6^th respondent is not eligible for appointment to the post of OA/Peon, because she possesses a Degree and B.Ed. (Bachelor of Education), acquired in 2007 and 2008, respectively. Furthermore, her annual income, as per the certificate issued on 18.07.2018, was ₹6,01,680/-.

4. Later, the qualification was integrated into the Kerala Last Grade Service Rules by an amendment [GO(P) No. 12/2016/P&ARD dated 04.06.2016] through a residue provision of the said amend- ment Act. The amendment was initially given effect retrospectively from 01.07.2011, the date of the earlier G.O.

5. Subsequently, the effective date was modified to the date of the G.O., i.e., 04.06.2016, by another order. This change was implemented because the qualifications for Last Grade Servants in various departments, prescribed by the Government, with effect from 01.07.2011, had not been incorporated into the Special Rules until the amendment dated 04.06.2016. The amendment was made to take effect retrospectively from 01.07.2011.

6. In the meantime, the Public Service Commission (PSC) had started the selection process for the Last Grade Service, published the rank list on 30.06.2015, and was advising candidates thereafter. In order to enable the Commission to continue advising candidates from this rank list, which was prepared prior to the amendment, the effective date of the said amendment was fixed as 04.06.2016. 7. In the meantime, the Assistant Educational Officer (AEO) directed the 2^nd petitioner to consider the 6^th respondent’s claim under Rule 51B of the KER, notwithstanding the 2^nd petitioner’s contention that the 6th respondent had forfeited her right to the claim upon her marriage.

8. The Second Petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Director of Education (DDE), which was decided in favour of the 6^thRespondent. Aggrieved by this decision, the 2^nd petitioner preferred a Revision Petition before the Government.

9. In the Revision Petition, by order dated 17.09.2018, the Government directed the 2^nd petitioner to issue an appointment order to the 6^th respondent within two weeks and to submit the joining report within two days thereafter. It was further directed that, in case of failure, disciplinary action be taken and reported to the Government.

10. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner preferred the prese