Pushpa Rani v. The Director Of School Education

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR Pushpa Rani W/o.Balasubramanian, M.Guddur, Madhemangalam Post, Dharmapuri Disrict 636 804.

..Appellant(s) Vs

1. The Director of School Education Chennai 600 006.

2. The District Educational Officer Dharmapuri District.

3. P.Shanthi W/o.Perumal, 2/69, Thammampatti, Elaligam Post, Dharmapuri District 636 804.

4. R.Manimala S/o.Rama Gounder, 2/35 Anna Street, Adhiyamankottai Post, Dharmapuri.

..Respondent(s) Writ Appeal filed under Caluse 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 06.10.2020 in WP.No.29302/2013 and grant the relief sought for in the writ petition by the appellant herein and thus render justice. For Appellant(s):

Mr.R.Dhanasekar For Respondent(s):

Dr.R.Gouri, Government Counsel for R1 & R2

Judgment (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present intra Court Appeal has been instituted challenging the writ order made in W.P.No.29302 of 2013. The non-selection of the appellant to the post of Night Watchman in Government Higher Secondary School, in pursuance to the recruitment notification of the year 2012, resulted in filing of the writ petition.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant would mainly contend that the authorities have selected junior to the appellant and pertinently, over aged candidates were also selected. While so, the case of the appellant ought to have been considered for selection.

3. However, the learned Government Counsel would oppose by stating even during the relevant point when the recruitment process was undertaken, the appellant was over aged. Thus, his case was not considered.

4. The Writ Court, considered the facts elaborately and found that the petitioner was not selected on the ground of over aged prescribed for appointment to the post of Night Watchman in Higher Secondary School. As per the recruitment notification, the maximum age limit fixed was 32 years as on 01.07.2012, but the appellant crossed the age limit prescribed in the notification. The Writ Court has further made a finding that even applying the

age relaxation, the appellant would not fall within the age limit and therefore, her case was not considered. Presently, the appellant is aged abut 50 years and recruitment was completed in the year 2012 and 14 years had lapsed. Thus, no further interference is called for. Consequently, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.

(S.M.S.,J.) (N.S.,J.) 10-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VSI To

1. The Director of School Education Chennai 600 006.

2. The District Educational Officer Dharmapuri District.

3. P.Shanthi W/o.Perumal, 2/69, Thammampatti, Elaligam Post, Dharmapuri District 636 804.

4. R.Manimala S/o.Rama Gounder, 2/35 Anna Street, Adhiyamankottai Post, Dharmapuri.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.

AND N.SENTHILKUMAR J.

vsi 10-06-2026