JUDGMENT : DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J. 1. The petitioner faces a paradoxical complexity in her career but from it arises a matter of forensic importance of general application, within the confines of the Kerala Education Act and Rules (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ and ‘KER’ respectively for short). 2. The petitioner is stated to be a graduate in Economics and in Education and she has been appointed as a Peon in a vacancy that became available in the Aided U.P. School, Vallikode - of which the 4th respondent is the Manager. However, when the proposal for approval of her appointment was forwarded by the Manager to the competent Educational Authority, it was rejected for the reason that she is overqualified, since, going by the provisions of Chapter XXIVB of the KER, only a person whose qualifications adhere to the prescriptions made by the Government for posts under its services, will be eligible to be so appointed. 3. The petitioner says that the reasons stated by the Educational Authorities are untenable because only the provisions of Chapter XXIVA of the KER are applicable to her and not that of Chapter XXIVB and alternatively contends that even if Chapter XXIVB is applicable, the denial of approval to her appointment on the ground that she is a graduate is flawed, since the mandatory provisions of Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA of the KER, in particular the Notes thereunder, would be rendered otious and redundant. She, therefore, prays that Exts.P4 and P6 orders, issued by the official respondents, be set aside and respondents 2 and 3 be directed to approve her appointment as a Peon in the School dehors the objections recorded in the said orders. 4. I have heard Dr. George Abraham, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri. P. Gopal, learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent-Manager and Sri. P.M. Manoj, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. 5. Dr. George Abraham began his submissions by showing me that Chapter XXIVB of the KER was brought into effect on 23.02.1965, wherein, many of the provisions of Chapter XXIVA have been specifically made applicable. P. Gopal, learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent-Manager and Sri. P.M. Manoj, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. 5. Dr. George Abraham began his submissions by showing me that Chapter XXIVB of the KER was brought into effect on 23.02.1965, wherein, many of the provisions of Chapter XXIVA have been specifically made applicable. He pointed out that, as per Chapter XXIVA of the KER, the sole qualification fixed for a Peon in an Upper Primary School is that he/she should be literate, without fixing any upper limit of education; and he asserts that this is apposite, since the said person can aspire to be appointed as a Clerk/Teacher in the school depending upon his/her educational qualifications, under the mandate of Note No. 1 to Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA of the KER - under which a member of the non-teaching staff in the category of Clerks/Peons/Sweepers will also be eligible for being appointed as a Teacher, provided he/she possesses the prescribed qualifications and there is no other eligible teacher for promotion or appointment to such post. 6. Dr. George Abraham then submitted that the impugned orders have, however, been issued by the Educational Authorities solely because Rule 4 of Chapter XXIVB of the KER stipulate that qualifications of the non-teaching staff in Aided Schools will be the same as the qualifications prescribed for non-teaching staff in Government Schools. He then conceded that, as far as the Government Schools are concerned, the Rules which apply are the ‘Special Rules for the Kerala Last Grade Service, 1966’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Last Grade Rules’ for short), which, after the amendment dated 04.06.2016, prescribes that a person seeking to be appointed as a Peon (which post has now been re-designated in the said Rules as ‘Office Attendant’) ‘should have passed Class 7 and should not have acquired graduation’ (sic). 7. Dr. 7. Dr. George Abraham reiteratingly contended that these provisions are, however, not applicable to Peons in aided Upper Primary Schools because, as said above, on the strength of the first Note to Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA of the KER, such persons obtain a statutory right to be appointed as a Teacher, subject to him/her having the requisite qualifications and therefore, that the stipulations in the ‘Last Grade Rules’ - that a person seeking appointment as a Peon should not acquire graduation - is inconsistent with the scheme of the Act and the KER. He, therefore, prayed that Exts.P4 and P6 be set aside and his client’s proposal for approval of appointment be directed to be granted by the competent Educational Authorities. 8. Sri. P. Gopal, learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent-Manager of the School, while endorsing the afore submissions of Dr. George Abraham, further explained that a learned Division Bench of this Court has affirmatively declared in Ananthakumari vs. Raghava Kurup, 2002 (1) KLT 787 , that a Peon in an Aided School obtains a vested right for being appointed even as a language Teacher, on the strength of the first and second Notes to Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA of the KER and that the apparent prohibition in offering such promotion to the post of a language Teacher under Rule 43B of Chapter XIVA, will have to yield to the affirmative right guaranteed by the former Rule. He, therefore, submitted that since this Court has thus declared that a Peon in an aided school obtains a statutory right to be considered for promotion as a Teacher, it would be totally incongruent to even suggest that a person who seeks to be so appointed, would stand disqualified solely because of the acquisition of graduation. 9. Sri. P. Gopal further pointed out that even in the case of compassionate appointments to the dependants of employees who die while in harness - as provided by Rule 51B of Chapter XIVA of the KER - whatever be the qualifications that a candidate may have, he/she can be only appointed to a post under Class III or Class IV as per the Scheme for Compassionate Appointment, published by the Government through their Order No. GO (P) No. 12/99/P&ARD, dated 25.04.1999. He thus argued that when a Peon has a vested right to be appointed as a Teacher and when a person can be appointed only as a Last Grade Servant under the Dying-in-Harness Scheme who then gets entitlement to be appointed as a Teacher, under the sanction of the first and second Notes to Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA, it would stand to no intelligible reason or logic that such a candidate must not have acquired graduation. 10. Sri. Gopal fortified his submissions by relying upon the judgment of another learned Division Bench of this Court in Rajendran vs. State of Kerala, 1993 (1) KLT 893 , which has ingeminatingly declared that the Act and KER provide a complete scheme as far as aided schools are concerned and that the non-teaching staff under the category of Clerks, Peons, Sweepers and others are also eligible to be appointed as Teachers, subject to him/her having or acquiring the prescribed qualifications. He thus predicated that the ratio of the afore cited judgments and the sweep of the Notes under Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA of the KER would make it irrefragable that no upper quali-ficational limit can be prescribed for the purpose of appointment of Peons in Aided Upper Primary Schools, even though the ‘Last Grade Rules’ may prescribe so. He thus prayed that this Writ Petition be allowed and the prayer sought for by the petitioner be granted. 11. In response to the afore submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and the Manager of the School, Sri. P.M. Manoj - learned Senior Government Pleader, submitted that there can be no contest that, as far as non-teaching staff in Aided Schools who are appointed after 01.10.1964 are concerned, only the provisions of Chapter XXIVB of the KER applies, since it makes it so clear therein itself. He submitted that, therefore, when this Chapter is the only one that would apply to the non-teaching staff of Aided Schools who are appointed after 01.10.1964, necessarily, Rule 4 thereof will also have to be fully applied, which mandates that the qualifications of the non-teaching staff shall be the same as the qualification prescribed for the non-teaching staff in Government Schools. 12. Sri. 12. Sri. P.M. Manoj elaborated his submissions by saying that the qualifications, as far as the non-teaching staff in Government Schools are concerned, are governed by the ‘Last Grade Rules’ which, through the amendment affected as per Ext.P8 on 01.07.2011, makes it incumbent that any such person must pass the 7th standard, but should not acquire graduation. He submitted that the unmistakable intent in bringing in the said amendment to the ‘Last Grade Rules’ through Ext.P8, is to protect the right of lesser qualified candidates for appointments to posts in Category III and Category IV and therefore, that the petitioner cannot seek that her approval in the post of Peon in the School in question be granted dehors the said Rules. He, therefore, prayed that this Writ Petition be dismissed. 13. As I have said in the prefatory paragraph of this judgment, any declaration that this Court makes in this Writ Petition will have a general application, since what is posed for my consideration is whether a person who aspires to be a Peon in an Aided Upper Primary School, governed by the KER, would be restricted by the qualifications prescribed in the Last Grade Rules. 14. Even though Dr. George Abraham, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that Chapter XXIVB of the KER has no application to the petitioner and that only Chapter XXIVA thereof should apply, I cannot find favour with it because, even going by Rule 1 of the former, it is made clear that all non-teaching staff of Aided Schools who are appointed after 01.10.1964 will be governed only by its provisions. This is unmistakable because Chapter XXIVA of the KER was brought into force on 30.06.1959; while Chapter XIVB was endrafted only on 23.02.1965, giving an option to those non-teaching staff of Aided Schools, who were in service as on 01.10.1964, to opt to be governed by the Rules under it or to continue under the former. 15. Ineluctably, therefore, I cannot countenance the submissions of the petitioner that she is governed by Chapter XXIVA of the KER, which provides that the qualification of a Peon is only that he/she should be literate. 16. 15. Ineluctably, therefore, I cannot countenance the submissions of the petitioner that she is governed by Chapter XXIVA of the KER, which provides that the qualification of a Peon is only that he/she should be literate. 16. Thus moving on with the precept that Chapter XXIVB alone will apply to the petitioner, the pertinent question is whether the qualifications, as prescribed in Rule 4 thereof, would restrict the right of a graduate to seek appointment as a Peon in an Aided Upper Primary School. 17. As rightly stated by Dr. George Abraham and Sri. P. Gopal, Note 1 to Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA of the KER conclusively declare that the members of the non-teaching staff, who are educationally qualified, are entitled to seek to be appointed as a Teacher of the School in the absence of an eligible teacher for promotion or appointment to such post. Further, in the case of compassionate appointments under Rule 51B of Chapter XIVA of the KER, the Government has published a scheme called the ‘Dying-in-Harness Scheme’ on 25.04.1999, under which, appointments are to be confined to Class III and Class IV posts in the Subordinate Service, Last Grade Service or in Part-time Contingent Service, to which direct recruitment is one of the methods of appointment. 18. Hence, when a person secures employment either on merit or under the Dying-in- Harness scheme as a Peon in an Aided Upper Primary School, he/she immediately acquires a vested statutory right to be considered for appointment as a teacher under the sweep of Note 1 of Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA of the KER. This position can now brook no doubt because, as rightly stated by Dr. George Abraham and Sri. P. Gopal, in Ananthakumari (supra), a learned Division Bench of this Court has held that even when Rule 43B of the KER did not prescribe specifically that a Peon is eligible to be appointed as a language Teacher, it will have to be read into it, on account of the requirements under the Notes to Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA of the KER. 19. 19. When one so notices the singular scheme of the KER, where, in contradistinction to the Government service, even Peons obtain a right to be considered for appointment as teachers, it becomes indubitable that the educational prescriptions in the ‘Last Grade Rules’ which otherwise will apply to non-teaching staff in aided schools because of Rule 4 of Chapter XXIVB of the KER, have to be read down as far as Peons are concerned. This is necessary because the Act and the KER are special statutes, which are intended to exclusively govern schools in the aided sector and the provisions thereof will necessarily have to be read in such a manner, so as to enliven every provision of its, without rendering them redundant in any manner. 20. My opinion above is guided by the acme tenet of interpretation of statues that Courts should interpret contradictory provisions in a manner to harmonise them, so that the purpose of the statute can be given full effect to. The celebrated judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sultana Begum vs. Premchand Jain, 1979 SCC 1006, speaks of this un-expendable obligation of Courts, in the context of Part II of the Code of Civil Procedure, in the words below: 10. Part II of the Code of Civil Procedure, comprising of Sections 36 to 74, as also the whole of Order XXI consisting of Rules 1 to 106, deal with the execution of decree, Section 47, as also Order XXI, Rule 2 are, therefore, part of the same legal or statutory system dealing with the same subject, namely, execution of decree. That being so, the rule of interpretation requires that while interpreting two inconsistent, or obviously repugnant provisions of an Act, the Courts should make an effort so that the purpose of the Act may be given effect to and both the provisions may be allowed to operate without rendering either of them otiose. 11. The statute has to be read as a whole to find out the real intention of the legislature. In the afore perspective, there can be little doubt left that the Peon of an Aided Upper Primary School obtains the right to be appointed as a Teacher, provided he/she has the requisite educational qualification. 21. 11. The statute has to be read as a whole to find out the real intention of the legislature. In the afore perspective, there can be little doubt left that the Peon of an Aided Upper Primary School obtains the right to be appointed as a Teacher, provided he/she has the requisite educational qualification. 21. Apodictically, therefore, to say that a person should not secure graduation, if he is to be appointed as Peon in an aided Upper Primary School, solely because the “Last Grade Rules” so say, would cause severe violence to the statutory Scheme of the Act and the KER and cannot be therefore, granted imprimatur by this Court. 22. Needless to say, therefore, even though Rule 4 of Chapter XXIVB of the KER makes the qualifications prescribed for non-teaching staff of Government Schools applicable to non-teaching staff of Aided Schools also, the amendments brought into the ‘Last Grade Rules’ through Ext.P8, to the extent to which it prescribes an upper educational limit of qualification for Peons, cannot apply, since otherwise, the very Scheme of the KER would collapse. 23. When the undeniable intent of the KER is to provide a promotional avenue to Peons, even to the post of Teachers, it would be egregiously illogical and inconsistent to even propose that only persons who are not holding graduation can be so appointed, thus defeating a statutory right wholly and without any rationale. 24. In summation, as far as the Peons in Aided Upper Primary Schools are concerned, though the lower qualification as prescribed in the ‘Last Grade Rules’ may apply - which I am, however, not declaring affirmatively, being not called upon to do so - the upper limit of educational qualification fixed therein would obtain no application. 25. I am certain that this Court is therefore, now enjoined to read down the provisions to such effect and to declare so. 25. I am certain that this Court is therefore, now enjoined to read down the provisions to such effect and to declare so. Resultantly, I declare that the upper educational qualification stipulated in the Special Rules for the Kerala Last Grade Service, 1966, would not apply to the appointment of a Peon in an Aided Upper Primary School, since it would otherwise cause violence to the prescriptions of Notes 1 and 2 of Rule 1 of Chapter XIVA and I consequentially, set aside Exts.P4 and P6 orders, with a direction to the 3rd respondent to reconsider the proposal for approval of appointment of the petitioner as a Peon in the Aided U.P. School, Vallikode, de hors the objections edificed on her having acquired graduation. 26. The afore exercise shall be completed by the 3rd respondent as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the resultant order shall be issued within the time frame.