Judgment :- Radhakrishnan, J. The only question to be considered in this case is whether approval of the Educational Authorities is necessary before relieving a non-teaching staff on his resignation from the post. Manager and the Deputy Director of Education took up the stand that there is no necessity of getting previous approval of the Educational Authorities before relieving a non-teaching staff. Rule 48 of Chapter XIV-A of Kerala Education Rules provides that no teacher shall be relieved before the expiry of the term of appointment without previous approval of the educational officer. Such a provision was introduced in the K.E.R. so as to see that the interests of the students are not adversely affected. This will also safeguard the interests of teachers from the vagaries of the management. Except in the case of superannuation in all other cases of relieving from the school previous approval of the educational officer is necessary. This legal position was not seriously doubted by either side. Counsel appearing for the management however submitted that in the case of non-teaching staff there is no such provision in the K.E.R. We cannot accept the contention of the counsel for the management. Rule 7 of Chapter XXIV-B of K.E.R. deals with non-teaching staff which reads as follows: 7. The rules regarding appointment, probation increment transfer from one educational agency to another educational agency or transfer under the same educational agency discipline, maintenance of service records confirmation, promotion, seniority, and maintenance of seniority list contained in Chapter XIV (A) and the Conduct Rules in Chapter XIV(C) applicable to teachers of aided school shall mutates mutandis apply to thenon-teaching staff in aided schools. Rule 7 of Chapter XXIV(B) provides that the rules regarding appointment, probation, increment, transfer from one educational agency to another educational agency or transfer under the same educational agency discipline, maintenance of service records confirmation, promotion, seniority, and maintenance of seniority list contained in Chapter XIV(A) and the Conduct Rules in Chapter XIV(c) applicable to teachers of aided school shall mutates mutandis apply to the non-teaching staff in aided schools. It is true that the word "resignation" as such is not used in the above mentioned provisions. Contention was raised by the petitioner that the word 'appointment' would takes in all incidents of service including termination of service, relieving of a teacher on resignation etc. It is true that the word "resignation" as such is not used in the above mentioned provisions. Contention was raised by the petitioner that the word 'appointment' would takes in all incidents of service including termination of service, relieving of a teacher on resignation etc. We are of the view expression used in rule 7 would take in the case of relieving of teacher on accepting the resignation as well. Viewed in that angle we are of the view that previous approval of the authority was necessary for relieving the petitioner from the school. This was the stand taken by the District Educational Officer as well. We are of the view learned single Judge is right in his finding that relieving of a peon from the school without previous approval is illegal. Under such circumstance we find no reason to disturb the finding of the learned single Judge. Appeal lacks merits and the same is dismissed.