J U D G M E N T

The petitioner, who was appointed as an LG. Arabic Teacher in a retirement vacancy with effect from 01.08.2017, has filed the writ petition seeking to challenge the staff fixation carried out by Ext.P6 order, which was detrimental to her. The challenge against Ext.P6 before the authorities under the statute, including the Government, was unsuccessful, as evidenced by Exts.P7, P8, and P9, on account of which, the petitioner has instituted the captioned writ petition before this Court.

2. I have heard Sri.V.A.Muhammed, the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Sri.N.B.Sunil Nath, the learned Government Pleader.

3. The staff fixation order at Ext.P6 was issued by revisiting the earlier staff fixation order at Ext.P5, on the assumption that there were only 16 students who were studying Arabic. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner would rely on Exts.P10, P11, and P12 series of Aadhaar cards of 30 students who were studying Arabic in the school in question, to contend that the refixation of the staff fixation by Ext.P6 was without any justification.

4. In the light of the details of the students produced by the petitioner as above, I am of the opinion th