1. Fourth respondent is a corporate management. It has many schools. In a leave vacancy of lower division clerk, in one of the schools belonging to the fourth respondent, petitioner was appointed. That vacancy was between 7 January, 1985 to 6 April, 1985. Later when another leave vacancy arose in one of the schools run by the fourth respondent, petitioner was appointed from 13 November, 1985. Since the permanent incumbent expired during that vacancy, petitioner was appointed in that regular vacancy with effect from 29 December, 1985. Above appointments were not approved by the District Educational Officers on the ground that fourth respondent ought to have promoted two peons who were fully qualified and posted as lower division clerks. Fourth respondent took up the matter in appeal before the Deputy Director of Education and the Director of Public Instruction without success. Thereupon, petitioner and fourth respondent preferred revision petitions under rule 92 of Chap. XIV-A of Kerala Education Rules before Government. By Exhibit P8 order, Government rejected both revision petitions. Hence this original petition.
2. Respondents 5 and 6 were working as peons when the vacancies of lower division clerks, to which petitioner was appointed, arose. Respondents 5 and 6 were appointed long subsequent to 1 October, 1964. So, their conditions of services are governed by Chap. XXIV-B of the Kerala Education Rules. Rule 7 of Chap. XXIV-B, inter alia, states that rules regarding appointment, promotion, seniority, etc., contained in Chap. XIV-A applicable to teachers of aided schools shall mutatis mutandis apply to non-teaching staff in aided schools. Note 1 to rule 1 of Chap. XIV-A provides that a member of the non-teaching staff under the category of clerks, peons, etc., shall be eligible for appointment as teachers, provided he has the prescribed qualification. As per rule 43 of Chap. XIV-A, vacancies in the higher grade of pay shall be filled up by promotion of qualified hands in the lower grade according to seniority. The combined effect of the above provisions is that a qualified peon is entitled to be promoted to the cadre of lower division clerk in preference to a direct recruit. When vacancy of lower division clerk arose in the school run by the fourth respondent on 7 January, 1985, respondents 5 and 6 were fully qualified to be promoted to that post. Their claim for promotion is protected by rule 43 of Chap. XIV-A of Kerala Education Rules. Petitioner's appointment to that vacancy has gone to affect the rights of these respondents adversely. So, educational authorities and the Government were justified in refusing to approve the appointment of the petitioner.
3. In view of what has been stated above, I find no merit in this original petition. It is accordingly dismissed. However, I make no order as to costs.