order, would qualify for the benefit of Rule 51A of Chapter XIV A of the Kerala Education Rules (in short, “KER”). According to the counsel for the appellant, as per Note (1) of Rule 51A, what is relevant is the date of first appointment and it being so, irrespective of the nature of appointment, so long as the appellant's date of first appointment is earlier to that of first respondent, appellant had superior claim over the 1st respondent against future vacancies. However, we are unable to accept this contention of the counsel for the appellant. As rightly noticed by the learned Single Judge, the appointments for periods shorter than one academic year were to be made on the strength of Ext.P8 circular issued by the Director of Public Instruction. A reading of clause (6) of Ext.P8 itself would show that such appointees cannot lay any claim for future vacancies on the strength of Rule 51A of Chapter XIV A, KER. That apart, interpreting the provisions of Ext.P8 circular and Rules including Rule 51A, the very same question was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Bindu v. Juby Thomas (2009 (2) KLT 178) , where, negativing the claim, the Division Bench held thus:
