JUDGMENT : (N. NAGARESH, J.) The petitioner states that she was appointed as LPST on03.12.2021, as per Ext.P1 against a promotion vacancy when one Devika R was promoted as Headmistress with effect from 01.06.2020. The promotion of Smt. Devika R as Headmistress from 01.06.2020 was approved as per Ext.P4 order dated 21.10.2020. 2. The petitioner states that the approval for the petitioner’s appointment as LPST was rejected by the Assistant Educational Officer holding that proposals for approval of seven senior Teachers are pending and that PwD candidate was not appointed. 3. The petitioner states that the approval was granted subsequently to the appointment of the seven Teachers as per Ext.P3 series. Therefore, there is no reason why the petitioner’s appointment as LPST cannot be approved. The petitioner states that one Smt. Harsha was appointed was LPST on 01.09.2021. Smt. Harsha was appointed against the vacancy of Smt. Jani Joseph, who was promoted from the post of LPST to the post of HST (Physical Science). However, the promotion of Smt. Jani Joseph was not approved on the ground that she does not possess K-TET qualification. As Smt.Jani Joseph’s promotion was not approved, approval was not granted to appointment of Smt. Harsha as LPST. It is on this excuse that now the approval for appointment of the petitioner is not being granted. 4. Government Pleader entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. On behalf of the 3 rd respondent, it is submitted that as per Samanwaya roster, there are 74 Schools under the Corporate Management all over Kerala. The petitioner was appointed in a regular vacancy and was working in the School in Ernakulam District. Her appointment was rejected stating that the appointment of her senior Smt. Shyni E., Rule 51-A and 51-B claimants are not approved. The approval of appointment of the petitioner’s senior Smt. Shyni E., who was appointed on 06.06.2019, is now approved provisionally. But her another senior Smt. Harsha Issac’s approval is still pending, who was appointed on 01.09.2021. 5. The Government Pleader submitted that the approval of appointment of Smt. Shyni E. was provisionally approved under the provisions for reservation of Persons with Disability. But approval to the appointment of her another senior Smt. Harsha is not yet given. The senior appointee is not getting salary from 01.09.2021. 5. The Government Pleader submitted that the approval of appointment of Smt. Shyni E. was provisionally approved under the provisions for reservation of Persons with Disability. But approval to the appointment of her another senior Smt. Harsha is not yet given. The senior appointee is not getting salary from 01.09.2021. The 4 th respondent stated that most of the senior claimants including statutory claimants are satisfied and got approval, but Smt. Harsha’s approval is still pending. 6. The 4 th respondent entered appearance through counsel and filed affidavit. The 4 th respondent submitted that prior to the appointment of the petitioner, the 4 th respondent had made the following four appointments. Smt.Harsha as LPST with effect from 01.09.2021 against the promotion vacancy of Smt.Jani Joseph, LPST who was promoted as HST (Physical Science) with effect from 26.07.2021. Smt. Gigy M.P. was appointed as LPST with effect from 03.09.2021 in a retirement vacancy. Smt.Teena Jose K. appointed as LPST with effect from 03.09.2021 in a retirement vacancy. Smt.Maria Jose appointed as LPST with effect from 02.12.2021 in the promotion vacancy of Sr.Lovely P.J., LPST who was promoted as Headmistress The appointment of Sr.Lovely P.J. as Headmistress is approved. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel appearing for the 4 th respondent. 8. It is evident from the pleadings that the petitioner was appointed against a vacancy arose consequent to the promotion of Smt. Devika R as Headmistress with effect from 01.06.2020. Ext.P1 is the petitioner’s order of appointment. Ext.P4 would show that the promotion of Smt. Devika R was approved with effect from 01.06.2020. If that be so, ordinarily there is no reason why the petitioner’s appointment cannot be approved. 9. It is seen from the pleadings that the application for approval of the petitioner’s appointment was rejected as per Ext.P1(a) on the ground that approval has not been granted to seven other senior Teachers and that PwD candidate has not been appointed. Ext.P3 however, would show that services of those seven senior Teachers have been approved. Ordinarily, there should not be any subsisting reason for denying approval of the petitioner. 10. However, it is submitted that now the petitioner’s approval is kept pending on the basis of non approval of the appointment of Smt. Harsha. Ext.P3 however, would show that services of those seven senior Teachers have been approved. Ordinarily, there should not be any subsisting reason for denying approval of the petitioner. 10. However, it is submitted that now the petitioner’s approval is kept pending on the basis of non approval of the appointment of Smt. Harsha. It is evident from the pleadings that the said Smt. Harsha was appointed on 01.09.2021 against a vacancy arose when an existing LPST Smt. Jani Joseph was promoted as HSA. The approval was not granted to the promotion of Smt. Jani Joseph as HST for want of K-TET qualification. There is no dispute that Smt. Harsha was appointed against the vacancy of Smt. Jani Joseph. The non- approval of appointment of Smt. Harsha therefore need not be a ground to decline approval to the appointment of the petitioner. It may be true that if Smt. Harsha’s appointment is declined, Smt. Harsha may stake a claim for the post presently held by the petitioner. But that is only an eventuality, which has to be considered at the time when such an issue arises. 11. For the time being, I do not find any reason to decline approval to the appointment of the petitioner as LPST against the promotion vacancy of Smt. Devika R (Headmistress). 12. In the circumstances, notwithstanding Ext.P1(a), the 3 rd respondent is directed to consider approval of appointment of the petitioner as LPST in the vacancy arose on 01.06.2020 without regard to pendency of approval of Smt. Jani Joseph and Smt. Harsha. Orders shall be passed within a period of six weeks. The writ petition is disposed of as above.