Judgment :- 1. An interesting question in the K. E. R. arises for consideration in this original petition. The question is whether a teacher who is also the Manager of the school can get himself appointed as the Headmaster in view of the fact that he happens to be the seniormost qualified teacher entitled to be appointed as Headmaster. The prohibition is contained in R.8(1) of Chapter III of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959, for short, the K.E.R. The petitioner became the Manager of the school on 3-3-1955. At that time, he was already an Upper Primary School Assistant there. On 1-12-1975 when the post of the Headmaster of the Upper Primary School fell vacant, the petitioner appointed himself as Headmaster and approached the 2nd respondent Assistant Educational Officer for approval of that appointment. The 2nd respondent by Ext. P-2 dated 19-2-1976 returned that appointment unapproved drawing the petitioner's attention to R.8 Chapter III of the K.E.R Against Ext. P-2 the petitioner filed Ext. P-3 revision before the 1st respondent-State. But the 1st respondent by Ext. P-4 rejected the same. Thereupon, the petitioner approached this Court with this original petition challenging Exts. P-2 and P-4 and seeking a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent-Assistant Educational Officer to approve the petitioner's appointment as Headmaster. 2. Shri V. M. Nayanar, learned counsel for the petitioner, drew my attention to R.45 Chapter XIV(A) of the K.E.R, and contended that under the above rule the petitioner is entitled to claim the post of Headmaster as he is the senior most qualified Upper Primary School Assistant of the School. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner's rights under R.45 cannot in any way be whittled down by R.8(1), Chapter III of the K.E.R. Not only that, as per the proviso to the above R.8(1), according to the learned counsel, there is no prohibition for a Manager to continue as Headmaster. My attention also was drawn to the definition in R.2 Chapter I of the K E.R. which says ' 'teacher' includes the Headmaster' Learned Government Pleader contended that there is an express prohibition in R.8(1) of Chapter III that one who is a Manager or a member or other office-bearer of the Managing body is not eligible for appointment in that school. Learned Government Pleader pointed out that the right under R.45 Chap.14-A of the K.E.R. can be claimed by the petitioner only when he is not in any ' way disqualified under R.8 of Chapter III. Learned Government Pleader further pointed out that a teacher like the petitioner can become the Headmaster of the school only by virtue of an appointment and by approval of that appointment by the Educational Officer. 3. There is considerable force in the contentions of the learned Government Pleader. R.8(1) Chapter III of the K.E.R. reads: "8. Persons connected with Management not to be appointed in schools -(1), No person who is manager or a member or other office-bearer of the Managing body if any. referred to in R.2, shall be eligible for any appointment in that school under the same Educational Agency: Provided that Managers or members, or other office-bearers of the Managing body working as teachers including Headmasters when these Rules come into force, may continue to do so: Provided further that the sub-rule (1) does not apply to a staff or Teacher's committee where in the members of the staff or teachers of a school including the Headmaster are members." The express prohibition in R.8(1) of Chapter III of the K.E.R, is against the appointment of a person who is a Manager or a member or other office bearer of the Managing body of the school Of course, the proviso enables teachers including Headmasters who were Managers on the date when the K.E.R, came into force to continue to do so. But no further appointment is contemplated by the above proviso. So, the petitioner cannot take shelter under the definition of teacher in R.2 of Chapter I of the K. E. R. and claim the post of Headmaster which the petitioner can become only by virtue of an appointment and approval of the same. In view of the prohibition in R.8(1) of Chapter III of the KER. the petitioner cannot claim the post of Headmaster of the school under R.45 Chap.14-A. The petitioner has either to continue as Manager and content with the post of a teacher (Upper Primary School Assistant) or give up the managership and become the Headmaster of the school. 4. In this view of the matter, Exts. P-2 and P-4 are perfectly legal and the original petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.