Judgment :- 1. he question is whether the petitioner is entitled to salary for vacation. Ext. P1 dated 30th May, 1978 shows that the Pro-Vice Chancellor of the Kerala University granted his approval for the appointment of the petitioner in a leave vacancy during the period from 1-4-1974 to 17-8-1976 Admittedly the petitioner worked during that period as Junior Lecturer in the Fathima Matha National College, Quilon. Ext. P1 reads: 'The Pro-vice Chancellor has approved the appointments of Sri. Joseph Tito as Junior Lecturer in Botany with effect from 4-2-74 to 31-3-74 in the leave vacancy of Smt. Leelamma T L. and from 1-4-74 till 17-8-76 in a regular vacancy and that of Smt. Gertrude Fernandez as Junior Lecturer in Botany from 4-2-74 to 15-1-1977 in the leave vacancy of Rev. Sr. Kunjamma Tharian and from 16-1-1977 till the end of the academic year 1976-77 in a regular vacancy. Orders are issued accordingly." 2. By Ext. P4 dated 3rd April, 1979, the University wrote to the petitioner that he was not entitled to the vacation salary during April-May, 1974. This is what Ext. P4 says: "Referring to your representation, I am to inform you that as per Statute 16, Chapter XLIX of Kerala University First Statutes 1972, teachers appointed in leave vacancies with less than six (6) months service during an academic year are not eligible for vacation salary. Your first appointment was with effect from 4-2-1974 and during 74-75 you had only less than two (2) months service and so you were not eligible for vacation salary during April/May 1974. The University's approval order issued to you does not in any way entitle you to claim for vacation salary. As such your service for promotion as lecturer can be counted only with effect from the date of re-opening of the college during 1974-75." 3. It is contended on behalf of the University and the Department of Collegiate Education that the petitioner who was appointed at the commencement of the vacation was not entitled to salary for the vacation as per Statute 16, Chapter XLIX of Kerala University First Statutes, 1972 4. Statute 16 says: "Vacation salary:- A permanent teacher or a teacher on probation shall be entitled to full salary during vacation. Teachers appointed temporarily for a period of not less than eight months shall also be entitled to full vacation salary. Statute 16 says: "Vacation salary:- A permanent teacher or a teacher on probation shall be entitled to full salary during vacation. Teachers appointed temporarily for a period of not less than eight months shall also be entitled to full vacation salary. Persons appointed for more than six months ending with the last working day of the academic year shall be entitled to vacation salary in such proportion as the period of service rendered during the academic year bears to eight months." This provisions takes in three groups of people. The first group consists of persons appointed permanently The second group consists of persons appointed temporarily for a period of not less than eight months. It is that group to which the petitioner belongs. The third group does not concern us as it takes in only persons appointed for less than eight months but for more than six months. 5. In the case of a permanent teacher or a teacher on probation there is no doubt as to his entitlement to vacation salary. There cannot be any doubt in regard to a teacher appointed temporarily for a period of not less than eight months for the Statute says categorically that he shall be "entitled to full vacation salary" On the basis of this rule a person like the petitioner who was appointed for more than eight months with effect from 1-4-74 and who admittedly worked for the full length of his appointment is undoubtedly entitled to vacation salary. 6. It is, however, contended for respondents 1 to 3 that if the appointment was effective from a date which coincided with the vacation, such appointment would not carry salary for the duration of the vacation. I do not see why. No rule has been brought to my notice to the effect that an appointment could not be made during vacation or an appointment, if so made, would not carry vacation salary. If Statute 16 is the relevant provision, as it admittedly appears to be, the arguments urged on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 cannot be justified in terms of that provision. Any person who was appointed for more than eight months is entitled to salary for the entire period even if a part of the period is covered by vacation. If Statute 16 is the relevant provision, as it admittedly appears to be, the arguments urged on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 cannot be justified in terms of that provision. Any person who was appointed for more than eight months is entitled to salary for the entire period even if a part of the period is covered by vacation. In the absence of a specific provision denying salary for a part of the period covered by the terms of appointment, no person can be denied his salary merely because vacation intervenes. The object of the Statute is to recognise the right of a person permanently appointed or appointed for sufficiently long period to receive salary even during vacation. To say to the contrary in the absence of any specific statute is an unsustainable contention. Accordingly it is declared that the petitioner is entitled to salary for the entire period of his service commencing on 1-4-74 and ending on 17-8-76. The Original petition is allowed. No costs.