Sreerekha R. v. State of Kerala and others (WP(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021)

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V WEDNESDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 6TH ASWINA, 1944`** ## **`WP(C) NO. 21618 OF 2021`** ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` SREEREKHA.R., AGED 40 YEARS WIFE OF ANILKUMAR.K.P., HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (ENGLISH), S N M HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURACKAD, PURACKAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 561, (RESIDING AT CHITTEKKATTETHU VEEDU, VETTUVENI, P.O. HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 514). BY ADVS. V.A.MUHAMMED V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT ANNEX II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, P.O.JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014. 3THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA-688 001. 4THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, NEAR IRON BRIDGE, ALAPPUZHA-688 011. 5THE MANAGER, S N M HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL PURACKAD, ``` W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 2 ``` PURACKAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 561. 6SMT.USHAS.S HEADMISTRESS (NOT APPROVED), S N M HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURACKAD, PURACKAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 561. ``` ``` 7ADDL R7 CHANDRIKA K.C. HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (NATURAL SCIENCE) S.N.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA-688 561 8ADDL R8 ASHADUTT.A.N., HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (MATHEMATICS) S.N.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA-688 561 9ADDL R9 RAVILAL.T.R., HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (ENGLISH) S.N.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA-688 561 BY ADVS. ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA M.K.PRADEEP KUMAR G.BHAGAVAT SINGH ``` ``` SMT NISHA BOSE, SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER ``` ``` THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSION ON28.09.2022,ALONGWITHWP(C).23237/2021,THECOURTONTHE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 3 ``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V WEDNESDAY, THE 28[TH]DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 6TH ASWINA,1944 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 23237 OF 2021`** ``` PETITIONERS: ``` ``` 1CHANDRIKA K.C. HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (NATURAL SCIENCE), S.N.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA-688 561 2ASHADUTT.A.N., HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (MATHEMATICS),S.N.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA-688 561 3RAVILAL.T.R., HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (ENGLISH) S.N.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA-688 561 BY ADVS. G.BHAGAVAT SINGH M.K.PRADEEP KUMAR ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001 2THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, FORMERLY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014 ``` W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 4 ``` 3THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MEDICAL COLLEGE JN, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688 005 4KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4 ``` ``` 5THE MANAGER, S.N.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA-688 561 6USHA.S. HEADMISTRESS, S.N.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA-688 561 7R.SREEREKHA HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER (ENGLISH), S.N.M.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PURAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA-688 561 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA V.A.MUHAMMED V.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR ``` ``` THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSION ON28.09.2022,ALONGWITHWP(C).21618/2021,THECOURTONTHE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 5 ## **JUDGMENT** W.P.(C) Nos.21618 of 2021 is filed by Smt. Sreerekha R, seeking to quash Ext.P6 order issued by the Manager of S.N.M Higher Secondary School, Purackad, appointing Smt.Ushas, the 6th respondent herein, as the Headmistress of the School and for a declaration that she is entitled to be promoted as Headmistress from 01.06.2021. The petitioner has also sought for issuance of a direction to the 5th respondent to implement Ext.P8 order issued by the DEO, Alappuzha, as per which the proposal submitted by the Manager seeking approval of the appointment of Smt. Ushas was declined, and it was ordered that the petitioner is the person entitled for promotion to the post of Headmistress. 2. W.P.(C) No.23237 of 2021 is filed by respondents 7 to 9 in W.P.(C) No.21618 of 2021, seeking a declaration that the petitioners in the said writ petition are entitled to be considered provisionally for the benefit under the third proviso to Rule 44A Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959 for promotion to the post of Headmaster of Sreenarayana Memorial Higher Secondary School, which has arisen on 01.06.2021 and for W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 6 incidental reliefs. 3. For ease and clarity, parties and Exhibits shall be referred to as described in W.P.(C) No.21618 of 2021 unless otherwise stated. 4. Smt. Sreerekha states that she commenced continuous approved service as HST (English) with effect from 13.07.2007 in the SNM Higher Secondary School, Purackad, an Aided school managed by the 5th respondent and governed by the provisions of the Kerala Education Act and the Rules framed thereunder. She states that she has completed 12 years of continuous graduate service with a pass in the test in Kerala Education Act and Rules and a pass in Account test (Lower) conducted by the Public Service Commission as prescribed in Rule 44A(1) of Chapter XIV A of the KER. To substantiate the above contentions, the petitioner relies on Exts.P1 to P4. 5. On 01.06.2021, a regular vacancy of Headmistress arose on account of retirement, and according to the petitioner, she was the senior most fully qualified claimant under Rule 43 of Chapter XIVA for promotion to the said post. In the said circumstances, she approached the Manager and submitted Exhibit P5 representation seeking promotion. However, the Manager refused to consider the request of the petitioner and appointed W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 7 Smt.Ushas as Headmistress as per Exhibit P6 order, though she was not having the requisite test qualification. The petitioner, in the said circumstances, preferred Exhibit P7 appeal before the DEO invoking Rule 44(2) of Chapter XIV A, seeking to appoint the petitioner after canceling Exhibit P6. The petitioner contends that the DEO, as per Exhibit P8 order dated 12.09.2021 declined the proposal for approval submitted by the Manager in respect of Smt. Ushas and also ordered that the petitioner is the person who is test qualified and entitled to be considered for promotion. Relying on Ext.P9, G.O.(M.S) No.157/2015/G.Edn. dated 10.6.2015, it is contended that in the case of appointments to the post of Headmaster, preference is to be given to those teachers who have acquired the test qualifications specified in the Rule. The petitioner contends that as per the third proviso to Rule 44A(1) of Chapter XIV A of the KER, in the case of appointment to the post of Headmaster, the test-qualified teacher would have preference. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Manager has not implemented the order passed by the DEO. It is in the afore circumstances that this writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: (i) Call for the records relating to Ext.P6 and set aside the original of the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 8 writ or order. (ii) declare that the petitioner is entitled to be promoted as Headmistress from 1.6.2021. (iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 5th respondent Manager to implement the Ext.P8 order forthwith by promoting the Petitioner as Headmistress from 1.6.2021. - 6. In the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent DEO, it is contended that the petitioner has commenced her continuous service as HST (English) with effect from 13.7.2007 onwards in SNMHSS, Purakkad. She acquired test qualifications in the Kerala Education Act and Rules and Account Test (Lower) in July 2020. It is stated that the petitioner has completed almost 13 years of service in the HSST cadre as on 01.06.2021 (13 years 8 months and 28 days). It is further stated that when the retirement vacancy of HM post arose on 01.06.2021, the Manager appointed Smt.Ushas S., a senior teacher as HM. However, the said teacher had not acquired test qualifications in terms of the extant rules and Government Orders. As preference is to be given to qualified teachers for the appointment as HM, the proposal submitted by the Manager was rejected as Smt. Ushas had not acquired test qualifications. The DEO also informed that W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 9 Smt. R. Sreerekha is a qualified teacher who is eligible for the post of HM. 7. In the counter affidavit filed by the 5th respondent, it is stated that the 6th respondent has put up 27 years of regular continuous service as High School Teacher in Malayalam in the SNM HSS, Purakkad, and she is now aged 55 years. It is stated that Smt. Sreerekha was appointed in the school on daily wages from 13.7.2007 to 31.3.2008 and thereafter in a leave vacancy from 1.6.2008 to 31.5.2012 against a leave vacancy of Smt. V. Suma. Thereafter, the petitioner was appointed as HSA (English) against a regular vacancy with effect from 1.6.2012. It is contended that the petitioner is not having 12 years of continuous regular service and is therefore not entitled to be promoted as HM. It is stated that Ext.P9 Government Order G.O.(M.S.) No.157/2015/G.Edn. dated 10.6.2015 was under challenge in **Manager, Pavandoor, HSS, Kozhikode v. Sadanandan C.M.[1]** and a Division Bench of this Court had occasion to hold that the said order cannot nullify the statutory provisions and cannot even be taken as clarificatory in nature. According to the respondents, the Government has introduced the 3rd proviso to Rule 44A of Chapter XIVA of the KER, as per Gazette Notification dated 13.12.2017 and brought into > 1 [2016 (5) KHC 78] W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 10 force with effect from 1.6.2015, the said amendment has been challenged and a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.755/2018 and connected cases has referred the matter to a Full Bench. 8. As finality has not yet been achieved, the Manager, in tune with the law laid down in **Sadanandan** (supra), has appointed Smt. Ushas, who is the senior most teacher entitled to be promoted and appointed as Headmistress with effect from 1.6.2021. It is contended that the DEO has rejected the proposal without considering the statutory provisions and further ordered that Smt. Sreerekha is entitled to be appointed as HM. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred an appeal memorandum before the Deputy Director, and the same is pending. 9. In the counter affidavit filed by the 6th respondent, the contentions raised by the 5th respondent are reiterated. 10. A reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioner controverting the contentions in the counter affidavit filed by the party respondents. It is contended that the action on the part of the Manager in promoting the 6th respondent is illegal and against the 3rd proviso to Rule 44A(1) of Chapter XIV A of the KER. It is stated that the petitioner has got continuous approved service as HST (English) from 13.7.2007 onwards and she has W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 11 acquired all test qualifications and therefore, she is the only teacher who is entitled to get promoted as HM as on 1.6.2021 on which day, the vacancy had arisen. It is stated that in view of the amendment notification dated 13.12.2017 introducing the 3rd proviso to Rule 44A(1) giving preference to test qualified hands over test exempted hands for promotions as Headmasters of High Schools, the decision in Pavandoor case may not have any application insofar as the instant case is concerned. It is further stated that the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, is applicable only to appointments of Headmasters in LP/UP schools and not applicable to the case of the petitioner. The petitioner would refer to Ext.P10 order dated 6.12.2019 as per which she was granted Higher Grade with effect from 13.7.2014 and Ext.P11 Government Order vide No. G.O.(Rt.) No.579/2022/G.Edn. dated 3.2.2022 as per which it was ordered that broken services in leave vacancies shall be reckoned for grant of higher grades. 11. However, in the additional counter affidavit filed by respondents 5 and 6, it is stated that the appeal filed by the Manager under Rule 8 (5) of Chapter XIVA of the KER has been dismissed during the pendency of the writ petition by Exhibit R5(e) order dated 26/3/2022 and challenging the W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 12 same, the Manager has preferred Exhibit R5(f) revision petition before the 2nd respondent, which is stated to be pending. 12. I have heard Sri. M.Sajjad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Nisha Bose, the learned Government Pleader, Sri.M.K.Pradeepkumar, the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent and Sri. Bhagavat Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent. 13. Smt. Nisha Bose, the learned Government Pleader referred to the law laid down by this Court in **Reena R.P. V. R.S.Geena and Ors[2]** ., and it was argued that during the pendency of the writ petition, the Manager has invoked the statutory remedy and has preferred Ext.R5(f) revision petition before the DGE. It is further submitted that the revision petition is scheduled to be heard on 26.9.2022, and in that view of the matter, necessary directions can be issued to the 2nd respondent to consider the same and pass appropriate orders. 14. I find that W.P.(C) No. 21618/2021 is filed by Sreerekha seeking a declaration that she is entitled to be promoted as Headmistress from 1.6.2021 and also for a direction to the Manager to implement Ext.P8 order > 2 [2010 (2) KLJ 165] W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 13 issued by the DEO, Alappuzha. I find from Ext.R5(b) that Ext.P6 order was challenged by the Manager before the Deputy Director by preferring an appeal and the order passed by the DEO stands confirmed in appeal. It also appears that the order has been taken up in revision by the Manager by preferring Ext.R5(f) before the DGE. From the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, it appears that the revision petition stands posted for hearing on 26.9.2022. 15. The learned counsel appearing for the parties have referred to the law laid down by this Court in **Sadanandan C.M.,** (Supra), judgment dated 28.3.2019 in W.A.No.925/2019 ( **Harifa Beevi Kalen v. The Manager, TPM Higher Secondary School and Ors.** ), **Narayanan v. Vijayalakshmi**[3] , **Rajamma P.R. v. Manager, St. George High School[4]** and **Pushparaj v. Manoharan[5]** to substantiate their respective contentions. Sri.M.K Pradeep Kumar would submit that though the Manager had filed a revision petition, in view of the legal issues, it is only just and proper that the matter is considered by this Court. 16. I find that factual issues are involved and further in the light of > 3 (2020 (4) KLT 198) > 4 [2012 (3) KLT 137] > 5 [2006 KHC 679] W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 14 the law laid down in **Reena R.P** (supra) and taking note of the fact that the manager had already availed the statutory remedy, I am of the view that it would be appropriate to issue directions to the DGE to consider the entire aspects and in taking a decision. I find that though the matter was posted for hearing on 26.9.2022, no orders have been passed to date. Insofar as W.P.(C) No.23237 of 2021 is concerned, the prayer in the said writ petition is to provisionally grant the benefits under the third proviso of Rule 44A of Chapter XIVA of the KER for consideration of promotion to the post of HM of the school which had arisen on 1.6.2021. The grievance of the petitioners appears to be that it was due to the restrictions imposed due to COVID that the conduct of the test was delayed, and they were prevented from appearing for the same. In view of the specific provisions of the rules, the petitioners cannot claim a declaration that they are entitled to be considered provisionally. That would go against the law laid down by this Court in the decisions referred to above. Resultantly, these writ petitions are disposed of by issuing the following directions: a) W.P.(C) No. 21618/2021 will stand disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to take up Exts.R5(f) revision petition W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 15 pending before the said authority and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, expeditiously, in any event, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. b) Before passing orders, the 2nd respondent shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners as well as the respondents 6 to 9. c) W.P.(C) No. 23237/2021 is dismissed. Sd/- **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE** PS/26/9/2022 W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 16 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23237/2021`** ``` PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS: ``` ``` Exhibit P1THE SENIORITY LIST OF TEACHING AND NON TEACHING STAFF OF THE SCHOOL AS ON 01.01.2021 Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE RESULT OF 1ST PETITIONER IN JANUARY 2020 DEPARTMENTAL TEST AS REGISTER NO.117928 THAT DENOTE 4TH RESPONDENT KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION CANCELLED KERALA EDUCATION ACT AND RULES TEST AS SERIAL NO.4 THEREIN Exhibit P2ATRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF NOTIFICATION NO.D.E.1-1/467672/2021-EW DATED 02.07.2021 OF 4TH RESPONDENT KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION DENOTING JANUARY 2021 EXAMINATION WAS POSTPONED ON ACCOUNT OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC SITUATION AND TO BE CONDUCTED ALONG WITH JULY 2021 DEPARTMENT TEST AS DESCRIBED IN PARA 1.1. Exhibit P2B1ST PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATION DATED 05.05.2021 BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT MANAGER Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF 2ND PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATION DATED 05.04.2021 BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT MANAGER Exhibit P3ATRUE COPY OF 3RD PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATION DATED 24.05.2021 BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT MANAGER Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.57/2021 OF 5TH RESPONDENT, MANAGER ``` W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 17 ``` Exhibit P5THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1/23085/2021 DATED 12.09.2021 OF 3RD RESPONDENT ``` ``` Exhibit P6THE TRUE COPY OF EXAMINATION RESULTS OF 1ST PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF 2 LEFT OVER PAPERS THOSE WERE CLEARED UNDER REGISTRATION NO. 228775 OF KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ``` ``` Exhibit P7THE TRUE COPY OF EXAMINATION RESULTS OF 2ND PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF ALL PAPERS THOSE WERE CLEARED UNDER REGISTRATION NO.231830 OF KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ``` ``` Exhibit P8THE TRUE COPY OF SRO NO.794/2017 DATED 13.12.2017 ``` ``` RESPONDENT EXHIBITS ``` ``` Exhibit R3(a)TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER NO.B1/23085/2021 DATED 12.09.2021. Exhibit R7(a)TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(Ms).NO.157/2015/G.EDN. DATED 10.06.2015 OF THE GOVERNMENT ``` W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 18 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21618/2021`** ``` PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: ``` ``` Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 13.07.2007. Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 01.06.2012. Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER DATED 03.03.2021 (KE ACT AND RULES TEST) Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER DATED 03.03.2021 (ACCOUNT TEST LOWER). Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE MANAGER DATED 24.05.2021. Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF SMT.USHAS.S. DATED 01.06.2021. Exhibit P7TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE DEO, ALAPPUZHA DATED 02.06.2021. Exhibit P8TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1/23085/2021 DATED 12.09.2021 OF THE DEO, ALAPPUZHA. Exhibit P9TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS)NO.157/2015/G.EDN DATED 10.06.2015. Exhibit P10TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FIXATION OF PAY IN THE HIGHER GRADE DATED 06/12/2019 ``` W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 19 ``` Exhibit P11TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.579/2022/GEDN DATED 03/02/2022 OF THE GOVERNMENT. ``` ``` Exhibit P12TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1/6598/16/K.DIS. DATED 8/3/2017 OF THE DEO, ALAPPUZHA. ``` ``` Exhibit P13TRUE COPY OF THE FINALLY APPROVED SENIORITY LISTS AS ON 01/01/2019 ``` ``` Exhibit P14TRUE COPY OF THE FINALLY APPROVED SENIORITY LISTS AS ON 01/01/2020 ``` ``` Exhibit P15TRUE COPY OF THE FINALLY APPROVED SENIORITY LISTS AS ON 01/01/2021 ``` ``` Exhibit P16TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.112/84/G.EDN. DATED 19/6/1984 OF THE GOVT. ``` ``` RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS ``` ``` EXHIBIT R4THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B1/23085/2021 DATED 12/09/2021 ``` ``` Exhibit R5(A)THE TRUE COPY OF G.O.(P)NO.1/2021/G.EDN DATED 05.01.2021 AS PER SRO NO.18/2021 OF GOVERNMENT OF KERALA ``` - `Exhibit R5(B) TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.377/T2/219/GEN.ED.OEPT DATED 25-11-2019.` ``` Exhibit R5(C)TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 20-08-2021 FOR TIME BOUND GRADE OF THE TEACHER INITIATED BY THE SCHOOL PRINCIPAL OF SNMHSS. ``` W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 20 ``` Exhibit R5(D) ``` ``` TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER NO. NDIS C4/6029/2021/RDD DATED 12-10-2021 OF THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CHENGANNOOR. ``` - `Exhibit R5(E) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B2/214683/2021 DATED 26-03-2022 OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ALAPPUZHA.` ``` Exhibit R5(F)TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION AND STAY PETITION DATED 04-04-2022 FILED BY THE MANAGER BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER RULE 8A OF CHAPTER 14 A OF KER. ``` ``` Exhibit R5(G)TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.42/22 DATED 07-04-2022 OF THE MANAGER. ``` ``` Exhibit R5(G1)TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B1/23085/2021 DATED 12-09-2021 OF 4TH RESPONDENT. ``` ``` Exhibit R5(G2)TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.57/21 DATED 12-08-2021 OF MANAGER. ``` ``` Exhibit R5(G3)TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B1/23085/2021 DATED 04-08-2021 OF 4TH RESPONDENT. ``` ``` Exhibit R5(H)TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.47/22 DATED 16-04-2022 OF MANAGER. ``` - `Exhibit R5(I) TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE SENIORITY LIST AS ON 01.01.2022 UNDER RULE 34 CHAPTER XIV-A OF KER` - `Exhibit R6(A) THE TRUE COPY OF G.O.(P)NO.1/2021/G.EDN DATED 05.01.2021 AS PER SRO NO.18/2021 OF GOVERNMENT OF KERALA` W.P.(C) Nos.21618 & 23237 of 2021 21 ``` Exhibit R7aTRUE COPY OF EXAMINATION RESULT OF 1ST PETITIONER HEREIN THOSE WERE CLEARED UNDER REGISTRATION NO.228775 OF KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REGISTERED FOR JANUARY 2021 ``` ``` Exhibit R7b ``` ``` TRUE COPY OF EXAMINATION RESULT OF 2ND PETITIONER HEREIN IN RESPECT OF ALL PAPERS THOSE WERE CLEARED UNDER REGISTRATION NO. 231830 OF KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REGISTERED FOR JANUARY 2021 ```