JUDGMENT : V. CHITAMBARESH, J. “Malayaala bhaasha than maadaka bhangi nin malar mandahaasamaay viriyunnu..........” wrote the lyricist Sreekumaran Thampi for the film 'Prethangalude Thaazhvara'. But unfortunately the pupils who study Malayalam language in curriculum are dwindling and resultantly the chances for appointment of teachers in the subject get bleaker. The Original Petition concerns the appointment of High School Assistant (Malayalam) ['HSA(Malayalam)' for short] in the Government Schools of the educational district of Wayanad. 2. The Deputy Director of Education was directed to report 17 vacancies of H.S.A.(Malayalam) to the Kerala Public Service Commission ('the PSC' for short) before the close of office hours on 17.7.2015 (on which date the ranked list expired). Such a direction was issued by way of an interim order dated 15.7.2015 in O.A.(EKM) No.642/2015 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short) filed by those who are in the ranked list. Seven vacancies had already been reported on that date and 10 more vacancies were provisionally reported in time by the Deputy Director in obedience to the interim order. The petitioners in this Original Petition who find a place in the succeeding ranked list published by the PSC on 11.4.2017 stake claim for appointment in the 10 vacancies aforesaid. The bone of their contention is that the vacancies arose only by virtue of the Staff Fixation Orders passed in the year 2016 whereas the earlier ranked list expired on 17.7.2015 itself. 3. We heard Mrs.Sumathi Dandapani, Senior Advocate on behalf of the petitioners, Mr.O.D.Sivadas, Advocate on behalf of the contesting respondents and Mrs.K.R.Deepa, Senior Government Pleader. 4. The strength of teaching staff is dependent on the strength of pupils in the school and Staff Fixation Orders are passed by the educational officers under Rule 12 of Chapter XXIII of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959 ('the KER' for short). Rule 12(6) of Chapter XXIII KER states that the fixation of staff shall be finalised by the educational officer not later than 15th July of every year to take effect from that date. It so happened that the several Government Orders fixing the ratio of pupils and staff for the academic year 2015-16 were the subject matter of a bunch of writ petitions in this Court. It so happened that the several Government Orders fixing the ratio of pupils and staff for the academic year 2015-16 were the subject matter of a bunch of writ petitions in this Court. Delay occurred due to this imbroglio and the educational officer could pass the Staff Fixation Orders for the academic year 2015-16 only on various dates between the period from 6.5.2016 to 24.10.2016. 5. The Staff Fixation Orders though passed belatedly should take effect from 15.7.2015 itself going by a plain reading of Rule 12(6) of Chapter XXIII KER and the time fixed for finalisation of the same is only directory. The educational officers could not have passed the Staff Fixation Orders earlier in view of the pendency of the bunch of writ petitions disposed of on 17.12.2015 only. There were appeals to the Division Bench and to the Supreme Court and the interim orders therein disabled the educational officers from passing Staff Fixation Orders in time. There is no reason as to why the maxim -actus curiae neminem gravabit(an act of the court will prejudice no one) shall not apply to the fact situation emerging in this case. Yet another maxim of equity -lex non cogit Ad impossibilia (the law does not compel to impossible ends) -has also relevance because of the inability of the educational officers: [See Raj Kumar Dey and others v. Tarapada Dey and others ( AIR 1987 SC 2195 ) and Poolpandi and others v. Superintendent, Central Excise and others ( AIR 1992 SC 1795 )]. 6. Vacancies to the post of H.S.A.(Malayalam) existed on the date of expiry of the ranked list on 17.7.2015 if the Staff Fixation Orders for the academic year 2015-16 take effect from 15.7.2015 though passed belatedly. The vacancies were reported by the Deputy Director to the PSC in time before 17.7.2015 which have to be filled from the ranked list which had not by then expired. The PSC has a duty to advise candidates even after the lapse of the ranked list provided the vacancies are reported to it during the period when the ranked list had life. The decision to that effect in Annie v. Commissioner, Chalakudy Municipality and others [ 1984 KLT 170 ] has been approved in Vimalakumari v. State [ 1994 (2) KLT 47 (FB)] which still holds the field. The decision to that effect in Annie v. Commissioner, Chalakudy Municipality and others [ 1984 KLT 170 ] has been approved in Vimalakumari v. State [ 1994 (2) KLT 47 (FB)] which still holds the field. The Tribunal was therefore justified in disposing of O.A.(EKM) No.642/2015 in terms of the interim order dated 15.7.2015 and refusing to review the same as sought by the petitioners. 7. The petitioners relied on a Government Order dated 29.1.2016 issued by the General Education Department to contend that the Staff Fixation Orders for the academic year 2015-16 can act prospectively only. The said Government Order pertains to additional posts only and that too after the amendment to Rule 12 of Chapter XXIII KER (which has not taken place after 11.8.2014). That apart an executive order cannot override the provisions of KER which is categoric that the Staff Fixation Orders at least for the existing posts take effect from 15th of July every year. It should be mentioned that O.A. (EKM)No.642/2015 was disposed of along with O.A. (EKM)Nos.1045/2015 and 1786/2015 filed by similarly placed persons by the Tribunal. The fact that the petitioners have chosen to apply for review of the common order in one of the Original Applications only is also a factor which dissuades us from judicial review. The Original Petition is dismissed. No costs.