Test qualifications for Headmaster appointments were upheld as paramount under statutory provisions, superseding seniority based on age exemptions.

J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Both these writ petitions are concerning appointment to the post of Headmaster in Dr. K.B. Menon Memorial High School, Thrithala. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of by a common judgment. The parties and exhibits are described / marked in this judgment as they are described / marked in W.P.(C) No.1072/2020.

2. W.P.(C) No.1072/2020 has been filed by the Headmistress of the School. The petitioner states that she was appointed as Headmistress on 01.06.2017 as per Ext.P1.

The appointment was approved by the District Educational Officer on 31.08.2017 as per Ext.P2. The 3^rd respondent filed an appeal. The appeal was rejected by the Deputy Director of Education as per Ext.P4. The 3^rd respondent preferred a second appeal before the Director of General Education. The Additional Director of General Education issued Ext.P6 order dated 04.01.2020 directing the Manager to appoint the 3^rd respondent as Headmaster.

3. The petitioner states that on the date of appointment, the petitioner was fully qualified and was the seniormost. Her appointment was strictly in accordance with law. An amendment to Rule 44A of Chapter XIVA KER , which provided for giving preference to the test qualified Teachers, was introduced by a Gazette Notification dated 13.12.2017, subsequent to the appointment of the petitioner as Headmaster. It cannot have retrospective effect. Ext.P6 order is therefore liable to be set aside.

4. The 3^rd respondent in the writ petition filed W.P.(C) No.8762/2024. The 3^rd respondent stated that he is working as HSA (PS) since 30.07.1992 and he possesses all requisite test qualifications. The Government issued Ext.P2 Government Order granting preference for appointment of Headmaster in High Schools to those who passed departmental tests. The 3^rd respondent being test qualified, he is entitled to preference for appointment.

5. The appointment of the petitioner as Headmistress was in violation of statutory rules as well as Government Order dated 10.06.2015. The 5^th respondent should therefore approve the appointment of the petitioner as Headmistress with effect from 01.06.2017. The respondents are compellable to recalculate the pensionary benefits of the petitioner including DCRG on grant of approval to the appointment of the 3^rd respondent as Headmaster from

01.06.2017 to 23.11.2020.

6. The 1^st respondent resisted the writ petition and filed counter affidavit. The 1^st respondent submitted that as per Ext.P5 seniority list, the petitioner was the seniormost Teacher placed at serial No.5 and the 3^rd respondent was placed at serial No.12. However, at the time of appointment, the petitioner was not test qualified. At the same time, she was eligible for the relaxation prescribed in second proviso to Rule 44A of Chapter XIVA KER . The 3^rd respondent was fully qualified for appointment to the post of Headmaster. The 1^st respondent found that as on the date of occurrence of the vacancy on 01.06.2017, the 3^rd respondent was fully test qualified. The petitioner passed departmental tests only in the year 2018. Hence, the 3^rd respondent was found to be the qualified hand at the time of occurrence of vacancy.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the departmental respondents.

8. The petitioner and the 3^rd respondent were working in the School. Evidently, the petitioner is senior to the 3^rd respondent in the seniority list maintained in the School. The petitioner possesses requisite educational qualifications. As on the date of occurrence of the vacancy, the petitioner did not have departmental test qualifications. But, the petitioner was above 50 years of age and therefore she was