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