In educational staffing, reductions must be justified by clear evidence of irregularities; otherwise, staff retention is warranted.

JUDGMENT Dated this the 13^th day of January, 2026 The petitioners state that they are Manager and a Teacher working as UPST, at PM UPS, South Paravoor. The School had 17 divisions with eight LPSTs and nine UPSTs in the Academic Year 2024-2025. As per the sixth working day statement for the year 2025-2026 and based on valid UIDs, the School was sanctioned the same number of posts and divisions as in 2024-2025.

2. The 2^nd petitioner was appointed as UPST in the retirement vacancy of Smt.Suja, UPST, as per Ext.P1 and she possesses all the requisite qualifications for appointment. The Staff Fixation Order was issued as per Ext.P4 granting 17 divisions with eight posts of LPSTs and nine posts of UPSTs. After the Staff Fixation Order, one student left the School by obtaining TC for personal reasons.

3. On coming to know the same, the 4^th respondent is now taking hasty steps to revise the Staff Fixation Order on the ground of an alleged reduction in students strength. As per the statutory provisions of the KER, the School was sanctioned with 17 divisions / posts with eight posts of LPSTs and nine posts of UPSTs and the authorities have no case that the School was sanctioned with 17 divisions / posts by misrepresentation or by bogus admission. Therefore, the 4^th respondent is not justified in taking steps to reduce one division in the School on the ground that a student had left the School after the Staff Fixation Order.

4. In an identical set of circumstances, when there was a threat of retrenchment on the ground that a student had left the School after obtaining a Transfer Certificate, the Teacher concerned approached the 1^st respondent and obtained Ext.P8 Government Order. In the said order, the 1^st respondent categorically stated that in the absence of any proof of irregularity or bogus admission, the mere fact that a student had left the School after the issuance of the Staff Fixation Order does not warrant a revision of staff strength and accordingly permitted the Teacher to continue in the School.

5. The facts and circumstances in Ext.P8 Government Order are squarely applicable to the case of the 2^nd petitioner. Hence, the 2^nd petitioner has approached the 1^st respondent by filing Ext.P7 Revision Petition. The petitioner prays for emergent orders thereon, with a further direction to restrain the 4^th respondent from ordering the retrenchment of the 2^nd petitioner.

6. Government Pleader entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. The Government Pleader submitted that the 2^nd petitioner was appointed as Upper Primary School Teacher in PM Upper Primary School, South Paravoor with effect from 02.06.2025 in the vacancy which had arisen consequent to the retirement of one UP School Teacher, Smt.Suja P.R., who retired from service on 30.04.2025. This appointment proposal has been submitted to the 4^th respondent for approval and the action is being taken on the same.

7. As per the student strength of the School for the Academic Year 2024-2025, the School was sanctioned one post of Headmaster, eight posts each of UPST and LPST, one Head Teacher vacancy, one Junior Language Teacher in the subjects of Hindi and Sanskrit and one Office Attendant, totalling 21 posts. So, after retirement of the incumbent UPST Smt.Suja P. R., an established vacancy had arisen in the School with effect from 30.04.2025 and to the said vacancy, the 2^nd petitioner was appointed.

8. In the beginning of the Academic Year 2025-

2026, there were 365 students as on the sixth working day, but only 363 students were having UID. Out of 363 students admitted in the School, the 1^st Standard is having a students strength of 32, the 2^nd Standard 40, the 3^rd Standard 31,