V. K. GIRIJA v. RESHMA PARAYIL & Ors.

#5. Further, the recruitment under Rule 4(2) of Higher Secondary School Teacher is a recruitment specially statutorily designed in a different manner providing for all vacancy in Higher Secondary School Teacher subjects, to be first filled up by Junior Lecturer in the subjects concerned under the management. Thus, recruitment under Rule 4(2) cannot be said to be “normal method of recruitment” to any service as contemplated by Rule 5 of 1958 Rules. Thus, 1958 Rules cannot be held to be applicable for making recruitment under Rule 4(2) of Chapter XXXII of the Kerala Education Rules. Further, a set of Rules of Chapter XXXII having been brought subsequent to Special Rules, intendment is clear that it was intended that general rule being Chapter XXXII shall be followed for appointment of teachers in aided institutions. [Para 13][1050-D-F]

#6. The Statutory Scheme as delineated by Chapter XXXII of Kerala Education Rules shall alone be applicable while making recruitment to the teaching posts and Rule 5 Note (3) of Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958 is not attracted. [Para 16][1054-A-B]

#7. The Division Bench of the High Court, thus, has taken correct view of the matter and has rightly reversed the judgment of the Single Judge restoring back the order of the State Government directing the management to appoint respondent by transfer as Higher Secondary School Teacher (Economics). [Para 17][1054-D-E]

#8. When as per Rule 4(2), the respondent was entitled for appointment by transfer, which claim has been accepted by the State Government, the claim of respondent cannot be negated on the premise that appellant has been working and satisfactorily discharging her duties for last more than 5 years and respondent may get another chance for being appointed by transfer when any other vacancy arises on the post of Higher Secondary School Teacher (Economics). [Para 18][1054-E-G]

#9. The appellant has no right to hold the post of Higher Secondary School Teacher (Economics) and on the said post, the respondent is to be appointed as per the direction of the State Government and affirmed by the Division Bench. The A B C D E F G H 1040 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 14 S.C.R. management is directed to appoint the respondent on or before 31.12.2018 so as to enable the respondent to join her post of Higher Secondary School Teacher (Economics) w.e.f. 01.01.2019. [Para 19][1054-G-H; 1055-A-B]

#10. In the ends of justice, the Court however, observed that the appellant, if willing to work on the post, at present held by respondent No.1, the respondents shall adjust her and allow her to work on the post occupied by respondent No.1 w.e.f. the same date, i.e. 01.01.2019. In the event, the appellant does not accept the aforesaid post, it shall be open for the respondents to proceed in accordance with law. [Para 19][1055-A-C] Maya Mathew v. State of Kerala and Others (2010) 4 SCC 498 : [2010] 3 SCR 16 – relied on.