The court mandates consideration of seniority based on merit listed in the rank list, ensuring fair promotion and appointments under educational regulations.

JUDGMENT Dated this the 20^th day of February, 2026 The Travancore Devaswom Board invited applications for the post of UPSA in various Schools under the Corporate Educational Agency. Based on the written test, the petitioner was invited for an interview as per Ext.P1 Call Letter. The petitioner performed well in both the written test and the interview and was included as Rank No.2 in the final select list published as per Ext.P2.

2. Respondents 8 to 12 are persons who were also included in Ext.P2 select list, but were ranked junior to the petitioner. The petitioner as well as respondents 8 to 12 were offered appointment as UPSA with effect from 27.02.2023. Except the petitioner, all others, namely respondents 8 to 12, were appointed against permanent retirement vacancies as UPSA. At the same time, the petitioner was offered appointment in a long leave vacancy consequent to the leave availed by Smt.Preetha G. from 19.01.2023 to 31.12.2026. However, the Controlling Officer, as per Ext.P4, rejected the appointment of the petitioner on the ground that the said vacancy ought to have been filled by appointing protected Teachers.

3. Later, the petitioner was appointed in a permanent vacancy with effect from 01.06.2023. However, the said appointment was approved only on a daily wage basis, as per Ext.P8. The grievance of the petitioner is that the juniors of the petitioner who were included in Ext.P2 rank list were offered appointment in permanent vacancies and the petitioner who was Rank No.2 was given a leave vacancy. The rank reflected in Ext.P2 has to be followed by the 7^th respondent while issuing orders of appointment. The 8^th respondent, who is junior to the petitioner was offered promotion as HSA (Mathematics) in a vacancy which arose on 13.11.2025. The petitioner is also fully qualified to be promoted as HSA (Mathematics) and is senior to the

8^th respondent in the Cadre of UPSA.

4. Hence, the petitioner seeks rearrangement of seniority of the petitioner as well as respondents 8 to 12 on the basis of rank reflected in Ext.P2 select list. The petitioner has also moved a detailed petition before the 2^nd respondent as per Ext.P10. The petitioner seeks appropriate directions to consider her claim for promotion as HSA (Mathematics) in the vacancy arose on 13.11.2025.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 4 and 7 and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 5 and 6. Notice to respondents 8 to 12 is dispensed with in view of the nature of the relief to be granted in the writ petition.

6. The petitioner seeks to direct respondents 6 and 7 to rearrange the appointment of the petitioner in the Cadre of UPSA and grant permanent appointment as UPSA with effect from 27.02.2023 onwards.

7. I find that in this regard, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P10 petition before the 2^nd respondent invoking the provisions of the Kerala Education Rules , 1959. In the facts of the case, it would be sufficient if the 2^nd respondent considers the same and takes appropriate decision thereon after hearing the affected parties also.

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the

2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P10 and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of two months after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the Manager, respondents 8 to 12 and other affected parties, if any.

Sd/-