Judgment :- Radhakrishnan, J. Petitioner in O.P. 16007 of 1995 is an Upper Primary School Assistant, now working as Headmistress in-charge of S.M.U.P.School, Chambakkara, in Kottayam District. She was put in-charge of the Headmistress by the 2nd respondent on 31-3-1994 on a retirement vacancy. Manager of the school forwarded the appointment order to the 4th respondent, the Assistant Educational Officer for approval. Fifth respondent is a graduate teacher who objected the appointment. Fourth respondent passed Ext. P2 order dated 29-4-1994 holding that the 5th respondent is a fully qualified graduate teacher and she has preferential right to be appointed as Headmistress of the School, The appointment of the petitioner was held to be irregular. Consequently the request for approval was rejected. Aggrieved by the said order, Manager preferred an appeal in May 1994 before the 3rd respondent who confirmed the order of the Assistant Educational Officer. Manager then filed a revision petition dated 19-10-1994 before the Government. Filth respondent however filed O.P.4760 of 1994 before this court praying for a writ of mandamus to implement Exts.P2 and P3 orders. An order was passed by this court on 19-12-1994 directing the Government to dispose of the revision petition filed by the Manager of the School. Revision petition was disposed of by Ext. P4 order dated 14-9-1995 holding that the 5 th respondent is fully qualified to be appointed as Headmistress and that the appointment of the petitioner as Teacher-in-charge is illegal and the same was set aside. Aggrieved by the above mentioned orders, petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. 2. Petitioner is the seniormost under graduate U.P.S.A in S.M.U.P School. According to the petitioner, 5th respondent is not qualified to be appointed as Headmistress of the school under Rule 45-C of Chapter XIV- A of the K.E.R. since the 5th respondent did not have continuous service equal to half the period of service of the senior most under graduate teacher. Petitioner has got. 9 years, 9 months and 21 days' service as on 1-4-1984 and she has got continuous service from 11-6-1984. According to the petitioner 5th, respondent does not possess continuous service equal to half the period of service of the senior most under graduate teacher. 3. Petitioner has got. 9 years, 9 months and 21 days' service as on 1-4-1984 and she has got continuous service from 11-6-1984. According to the petitioner 5th, respondent does not possess continuous service equal to half the period of service of the senior most under graduate teacher. 3. It is agreed by the counsel on both sides that the provision to be considered i n the instant case is Rule 45 of Chapter XIV-A of the K.E.R. and not Rule 45-C. It was also stated by them that the authorities also proceeded as if the matter comes under Rule 45 of the K.E.R. and not Rule 45-C. Rule 45 of the K.E.R. reads as follows: "45. Subject to Rule 44, when the post of Headmaster of complete U.P.School is vacant or when an incomplete U.P.School becomes a complete U.P.School, the post shall be filled up from among the qualified teachers on the staff of the School or Schools under the Educational Agency. If there is a Graduate teacher with B.Ed, or other equivalent qualification and who has got at least 5 years experience in teaching (after acquisition of B.Ed Degree) he may be appointed as Headmaster provided he has got a service equal to half of the period of service of the senior most undergraduate teacher. If graduate teachers with the aforesaid qualification and service ;ire not available in the school or schools under the same Educational Agency, the senior most Primary School Teacher with S.S.L.C. or equivalent and T.T.C issued by the Board of Public Examination, Kerala or T.C.H.issued by the Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board, Bangalore or a pass in Pre-degree Examination with Pedagogy as an elective subject conducted by the University of Kerala or any other equivalent training qualification prescribed for appointment as Primary School Assistant may be appointed." 4. As per Rule only a graduate with B.Ed degree with atleast five years experience in teaching after acquisition of the B.Ed. Degree shall be appointed as Headmaster. He should have service equal to half the period of service of the senior most under graduate teacher. According to the counsel, such service should be continuous service and not broken service. As per Rule only a graduate with B.Ed degree with atleast five years experience in teaching after acquisition of the B.Ed. Degree shall be appointed as Headmaster. He should have service equal to half the period of service of the senior most under graduate teacher. According to the counsel, such service should be continuous service and not broken service. Reliance was placed by the counsel on other provisions such as Rule 44-A, Rule 45-A, Rule 37, Chapter XIV-A of the K.E.R. Rule 44 of the K.E.R stales, the appointment of Headmasters shall ordinarily be according to seniority from the seniority list prepared and maintained under clauses (a) and (b) as the case may be of Rule 34. Manager will appoint the Headmaster subject to the Rules laid down in the matter. Rule 44-A deals with appointment of Headmaster, in Aided Complete High schools/ training Schools subject to the provisions contained in sub-rule (1) of Rule 44, the minimum service qualification for appointment as Headmaster, in Aided Complete schools/ training Schools shall be twelve year's of continuous graduate service with a pass in the test in the Kerala Education Act and the Kerala Education Rules and a pass in Account Test (Lower) conducted by the Kerala Public Service Commission. Explanation to the said Rules states that "Graduate Service" means all service of a teacher as High School Assistant, Training School Assistant, Headmaster of an incomplete High School, Headmaster of a complete Upper Primary school/middle School or Headmaster of a Training School after acquisition of Collegiate training such as B.T.X.T, or B.Ed, for appointment of a Headmaster in a complete L.P.School, the qualification prescribed is that a person should have passed S.S.L.C. or equivalent examinations with T.T.C. issued by the Board of Public Examination, Kerala or T.C.H. issued by Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board, Bangalore or a pass in Pre-degree. Examination with pedagogy as an elective subject conducted by the University of Kerala or any other equivalent training qualification prescribed for appointment as Primary School Assistant. In the case of those' who are continuing as teachers with Standard VII or its equivalent with H.E.T.T.C. or its equivalent training qualification they shall have 12 years of continuous qualified service as Assistant for appointment as Headmasters of Lower Primary Schools, 5. In the case of those' who are continuing as teachers with Standard VII or its equivalent with H.E.T.T.C. or its equivalent training qualification they shall have 12 years of continuous qualified service as Assistant for appointment as Headmasters of Lower Primary Schools, 5. Relying on the above mentioned provisions, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the intention of the Rule making authority is that service meant is Rule 45 of the K.E.R. is continuous service and not broken service. reliance, was placed in the decision in Raghavan Nair v. Balachandran Nair (1992 (1) KLT 390). The Division Bench while considering the scope of Rule 45, Chapter XIV -A of the K.E.R. took the view mat graduate teachers should be given preference if certain conditions are satisfied, namely that he is also having B.Ed, qualification, that he had service of five years after acquiring B.Ed, qualification and he has got service equal to half of the period of service of the "seniormost undergraduate teacher." If such graduate teachers are not available, then the senionnost primary school teacher with S.S.L.C. or equivalent and T.T.C. issued by Board of Public Examination etc. may be appointed, In oilier words, as per clause 2 it is sufficient if the graduate teacher with the qualifications mentioned therein has service equal to half the period of service of the senionnost undergraduate teacher, who must be qualified for being appointed as stated in the first clause. While computing the said period the rule making authority was obviously intending to give preference to a graduate teacher who has at least half the service of a qualified non graduate teacher coming under third clause of the rule. By sp interpreting construing the words 'senior most qualified undergraduate teacher' in clause 2 as the seniormost qualified undergraduate teacher it was ordered that the court would be reading clause 2 as per the language in clause 1. I am of the view that (he above mentioned decision is of no assistance in construing the word 'service' in Rule 45. 6. The Legislature has used the word 'service' only in Rule 45, Chapter XIV-A of the K.E.R. However, when considering rule 44-a with regard to the appoint the post of Headmaster in an aided complete High school/training School, the person should have 12 years of continuous graduate service. 6. The Legislature has used the word 'service' only in Rule 45, Chapter XIV-A of the K.E.R. However, when considering rule 44-a with regard to the appoint the post of Headmaster in an aided complete High school/training School, the person should have 12 years of continuous graduate service. So also in the case of Headmaster of a complete L.P.School the person should have 12 years of continuous qualified service. However in the case of UP School the emphasis is on qualification, experience and service and not on continuous service. 7. The word 'service' by itself without any qualification came up for consideration before a Full Bench of this court in Kunhikrishnan Nambiar v. Slate (1964 KLT 704). The Court held the word 'service' by itself without any qualification would ordinarily comprise all service. A similar question fell for consideration before this court in the decision reported in Gopalan Nair v. Regional Deputy Director of Public Instruction reported in 1980 KLT 845 and in Moosa v. A.E.O. reported in 1975 KLT (SN) 34 and in O.P. No.3072 of 1980 and in O.P.No. 1094 of 1980. In the earlier two cases what fell for consideration was whether the service of a teacher during minority which was permissible under the law obtaining in Malabar area would be qualifying service for promotion. The learned judge held in the affirmative. In the latter two cases the question considered was whether the three years' service necessary for promotion should be under the Kerala Government or whether the earlier under the Madras Government could also be taken into account for computing the necessary three years. The Court held in favour of combining the two periods. In Bhaskaran v. State of Kerala (1981 KLT 633), learned judge held mat the word 'service' takes in all kinds of service. A Division Bench of this court considered the scope of the expression 'service' in the Special Rules for Kerala Engineering Subordinate Service (General branch) in its decision in Marakar v. Kerala P.S.C. (1987(1) KLT 84). It was pointed out by the Division Bench that the word 'service' without any qualification means service of any kind and that service has to be taken into account for the purpose of qualification and only for that purpose. The context in which word 'service' has been used does not justify any other inference. It was pointed out by the Division Bench that the word 'service' without any qualification means service of any kind and that service has to be taken into account for the purpose of qualification and only for that purpose. The context in which word 'service' has been used does not justify any other inference. Emphasis of the Rule appears to be on the person concerned having become familiar with the duties of a particular post for a particular period. The Division Bench held expression'service' used in the Rule in question does entitle a person to count (he service rendered by him on a provisional basis. 8. Rule 45 of Chapter XIV-A of the K.E.R.,as I have already stated, emphasis is on qualification, experience and service. In other words the person should be fully qualified and should have experience and service, whether it is continuous or broken service. 9. There is no ambiguity in Rule 45 so as to read anything into it. The Rule does not expressly requires that the service should be continuous; No factors justifying inference that the service should be continuous have been brought to my knowledge. Whatever the rule making authority felt that service should be continuous service, it has chosen to use the expression "continuous". Rules 44-A and R.45-A of Chapter XIV-A of the K.E.R. use the expression "continuous" "graduate service" and "conscientious qualified service". So also Rule 37 uses the expression continuous service for determination of seniority in any grade. Since the expression 'continuous' has not been used and that the only expression in Rule 45 is 'service', I find no justification to read into the rule the prefix' continuous'. 10. It is admitted by counsel on all sides that if the broken service also is taken into consideration, the 5th respondent in O.P.No. 16007 of 1995 is fully qualified to be appointed as Headmaster of the school. It is admitted that she is a trained graciously teacher having more than five years of experience in teaching as on 1-4-1994 and has got more than half the period of service of the seniormost undergraduate teacher even though the said service is not continuous. In view of the above mentioned reasons, I am of the opinion that the authorities are perfectly justified in holding that the fifth respondent is the legitimate person to be appointed as-headmistresses of the school. In view of the above mentioned reasons, I am of the opinion that the authorities are perfectly justified in holding that the fifth respondent is the legitimate person to be appointed as-headmistresses of the school. I find no merit in the Original Petition. The O.P. is accordingly dismissed. 11. In view of the decision in O.P. No. 16007 of 1995, O.P.No. 4760 of 1994 has become infructuous and the same is also dismissed. When the judgment was pronounced counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is entitled to get salary from the dale on which the vacancy arose. Petitioner can approach appropriate authorities. O.P. No. 4760 of 1.994 is disposed of on the basis of the above mentioned observations.