Judgment :- 1. A short principle, applicable to fixation of staff in an aided institution under the Kerala Education Rules, arises for consideration. 2. The strength of teachers in departmental and aided schools has to be fixed every year in accordance with the provisions contained in Chapter XXIII of the K E.R. The Assistant Educational Officer, Balussery, visited the A.M.U.P. School, Punnassery, on 26-7-1983, verified the roll strength, ascertained the actual strength in each class divisions and fixed the effective strength accordingly. On the basis of the effective strength so fixed, he sanctioned two divisions each for Standards VII and Standard IV as the effective strength exceeded 50. The Director of Public Instruction modified this order on the basis of the report of another officer who made a super check under R.16 of Chapter XXIII K.E.R. 3. The D P.I. found that three students in Standard VII and one student in Standard IV should not have been counted at the time of strength verification for, they were " re-admitted pupils". Two other students in Standard IV should not also have been counted as there were some interlineations and erasures or absence of counter signature by the A.E.O. in the attendance register for the relevant period. 4. Does the K.E.R, contemplate the exclusion of all readmitted pupils in the computation of staff strength or does the exclusion apply only to any specified category? The co-relation of R.16 in Chapter VI, with the note to R.2 in Chapter XII in the application of the provisions of fixation of staff strength under Chapter XXIII thus arises for determination. 5. Chapter VI relates to admission and transfer and removal of pupils. Admissions have ordinarily to be made during the summer vacation and completed before the re-opening of schools. A pupil seeking admission on the basis of a transfer certificate duly issued from any school has to be admitted to the Standard of which he is found eligible according to the transfer certificate, provided not more than two months have elapsed since the issue of the transfer certificate. After the lapse of this period of two months, sanction of the educational officer is required for admission. (The exemption available to a private study pupil need not detain us). A pupil who has been dismissed from any school cannot be admitted without sanction of the Director. After the lapse of this period of two months, sanction of the educational officer is required for admission. (The exemption available to a private study pupil need not detain us). A pupil who has been dismissed from any school cannot be admitted without sanction of the Director. No pupil who has been sentenced by a court of law for more than two months' imprisonment for an offence involving mortal turpitude shall be admitted or continued in any school without the sanction of the Government. Admissions are open to boys and girls alike unless exemption is granted in special circumstances to particular institutions. 6. A pupil can be removed from the rolls if he has passed in the highest class in the school, if a transfer certificate has been issued to him, if he has been absent without leave for fifteen working days consecutively, if he has been continually absent for five working days from the reopening day, if he has been suspended for more than fifteen days, if he has been dismissed, if he has been sentenced for more than 2 months imprisonment for an offence involving moral turpitude or if he has been once presented for a public examination etc. The provision for removal of a pupil is contained in R.15 of Chapter VI. 7. R.16 in that same chapter relates to readmission of removed pupils and reads thus: "16. Re-admission of removed pupils:-Subject to the provisions in sub-rule (2) of R.11, a pupil who has been removed from the rolls but whose transfer certificate has not been issued, may on application presented by the guardian in the form of application for admission, be re-admitted to the class in which he was studying at the time of his removal, provided that all dues to the school are paid and the re-admission takes place during the same school year or the next school year. But the previous sanction of the Educational Officer shall be obtained for re-admission after the next school year. Pupils re-admitted will not be counted at the time of strength verification under Chapter XXIII of Kerala Education Rules. Provided that nothing in this rule will apply to pupil who completed S.S.L.C. Course. xxx xxx xxx". 8. But the previous sanction of the Educational Officer shall be obtained for re-admission after the next school year. Pupils re-admitted will not be counted at the time of strength verification under Chapter XXIII of Kerala Education Rules. Provided that nothing in this rule will apply to pupil who completed S.S.L.C. Course. xxx xxx xxx". 8. Chapter XII relating to the fees for admission provides in the note to R.2 thus: "NOTE:-When a pupil is admitted to a school with transfer certificate from another school, he shall be deemed to have been newly admitted even though he had been on the rolls of that school at some previous time." 9. Thus when a pupil is admitted to a school with transfer certificate from another school, it is a case of fresh admission and pupils so admitted have to be counted at the time of strength verification. 10. Where, however, the names of pupils have been removed from the rolls and no transfer certificates are issued to him and they are readmitted in the same school year or the next school year, R.16 enjoins that their names have to be excluded for the purposes of staff fixation. R.16 thus applies only to this restricted category. Fixation of staff strength is a statutory requirement to reassure about the adequacy of staff in each institution according to the uniform principles applicable to all educational institutions covered by the K.E R. and is intended to arrest the arbitrary exercise of power of appointment vested in the managements. The fixation thus advances the scheme of instructions and cannot impede the educational needs. R.16 thus does not admit of any wide interpretation to exclude all fresh admissions made in any year on the plea that they were at one time in the same school, when, in fact, they left and joined another school and came back with a transfer certificate later on. 11. To the same effect is the reasoning of my learned brother, Mr. Justice M.P. Menon, who, in an unreported judgment in O.P. No. 1475 of 1981-D stated thus: "Rule 16 of Chapter VI of the Kerala Education Rules applies to cases where pupils are removed from the rolls but those transfer certificates have not been issued. 11. To the same effect is the reasoning of my learned brother, Mr. Justice M.P. Menon, who, in an unreported judgment in O.P. No. 1475 of 1981-D stated thus: "Rule 16 of Chapter VI of the Kerala Education Rules applies to cases where pupils are removed from the rolls but those transfer certificates have not been issued. Before the issue of transfer certificates, parents can apply for fresh admission and subject to certain conditions the pupils removed would then be re-admitted to the same school and in such cases the re-admitted students will not be counted for the purpose of staff fixation. In the present case it does not appear that R.16 has any application at all. The students in question were studying in other schools who discontinued their studies in those schools and sought for admission in the 1st petitioner's school. They were admitted. They were not cases of re-admission within the meaning of R.16(1)." 12. Applying the principles stated above, it is the admitted case that the two pupils, Sreenivasan P. and Sasi M. were students of this school, some years back; they left and joined another school and came back to this school with transfer certificates and joined this school in 1982 and 1981. The staff fixation is for the year 1983-84. The A.E.O. was right and the D.P.I, was wrong in excluding the name of the two students in fixing the staff strength. If these two pupils are counted, on the particulars accepted by the D.P.I, itself, the effective strength of Standard VII exceeds fifty and two divisions were rightly given in Ext.P1 staff fixation. Even though there is some dispute about the other student, Krishnan Kutty, in the same Standard, from the averments in the pleadings, the conclusion is irresistable that he too should have been counted, because he also joined this school on the strength of a transfer certificate issued by the Punnassery A.U.P. School. The reasons given by the D.P.I, in Ext.P2 cannot be accepted as correct. 13. Regarding Standard IV, the A.E.O, on his visit included and the D.P.I. in Ext.P2 excluded three names Vasu M.P., Saleem M. and Mujeeb Rahiman. Of these Vasu M.P. is not a re-admitted student to whom R.16 applies. He was also admitted on the strength of a transfer certificate. The other two boys were noticed to have attended the classes when the A.E O. visited first. Of these Vasu M.P. is not a re-admitted student to whom R.16 applies. He was also admitted on the strength of a transfer certificate. The other two boys were noticed to have attended the classes when the A.E O. visited first. This is not disputed. But the D.P.I, states that there are some interlineations or corrections in their attendance register not countersigned by the A.E.O. There is no dispute that they were correctly on the rolls and could be included in the roll strength. There is no case that their names have been removed from the rolls. If so, when during the first visit of the A.E.O., he noticed that these pupils attended, their heads have to be counted as their attendance has been verified by the educational officer. The D.P.I. was wrong in excluding the names of these three students as well. 14. The Government have given the same reasons in Ext.P3 while confirming the D.P.I's order. Ext.P3 also cannot stand, when Ext.P2 itself fails. 15. Thus Exts.P2 and P3 are wrong and contrary to the provisions in Chapter XXII of the K.E.R., have wrongly applied R.16 in Chapter VI and are vitiated by errors apparent on the face of the record. Exts P2 and P3 are quashed and Ext.P1 staff fixation order will remain in force. The Original Petition is allowed; but in the circumstances of the case, no costs.