The court emphasizes the importance of timely consideration of qualification appeals under educational norms.

JUDGMENT Dated this the 30^th day of January, 2026 The petitioner states that she was appointed as Upper Primary School Teacher at the Ananganadi Higher Secondary School, Panamanna, Ottapalam on 04.06.2024. The petitioner’s appointment has not been approved stating that she does not possess K-TET qualification.

2. The petitioner states that she has M.Phil qualification and she is entitled to exemption from K-TET. Various Government Orders and Ext.P11 notification make it clear that the persons, who have got M.Phil, are exempted from appearing K-TET, contends the petitioner. The petitioner therefore seeks to direct the 2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P10 statutory appeal filed by the 4^th respondent against Ext.P9 and pass orders.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 3. Notice to respondents 4 and 5 is dispensed with in view of the nature of the relief to be granted in the writ petition.

4. By Ext.P9 order, the 3^rd respondent has held that the petitioner does not possess K-TET and therefore, approval cannot be granted. It is submitted that the Government has issued various orders exempting Teachers from obtaining K-TET qualification in certain cases.

5. In view of the afore fact and since the Manager has filed Ext.P10 appeal before the 2^nd respondent, it would be only just and proper that the 2^nd respondent considers the appeal and takes a decision in accordance with law expeditiously, which may redress the grievance raised by the petitioner.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P10 and pass appropriate orders thereon, if orders are not already passed, within a period of two months after giving opportunity of hearing to the Manager as well as the petitioner.

Sd/-