N.Fayaz Ahmed v. The Director Of School Education
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P.No.23147 of 2025 N. Fayaz Ahmed ...petitioner Vs
1. The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
2. The Chief Educational Officer, Thirupattur District, Thirupattur.
3. The District Educational Officer, Thirupattur District, Thirupattur.
3. The Correspondent Anaikar Oriental ( Arabic) Higher Secondary School, M.C. Road, Ambur - 635 802.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records connected with the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in A.Thi.Mu.No.001980/Aa3/2024 dated Nil.07.2024 signed on 19.07.2024 1/6
and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as B.T.Assistant(Science), Urdu Medium Teacher, in the 4th respondent school with effect from 10.06.2024 with all consequential monetary benefits and pass orders. For Petitioner :Mr.SN. Ravichandran For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr. S.Mythreye Chandru Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
This writ petition is filed to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records connected with the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent A.Thi.Mu.No.001980/Aa3/2024 dated Nil.07.2024 signed on 19.07.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as B.T.Assistant(Science), Urdu Medium Teacher, in the 4th respondent school with effect from 10.06.2024 with all consequential monetary benefits. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed as B.T. Assistant on 10.06.2024 in 2/6
a sanctioned vacancy. The learned counsel further submit that on 10.06.2024 when the school submitted the proposal to the second respondent through the third respondent, the same was rejected by the third respondent on merits. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the appropriate authority to consider the said proposal is the second respondent namely the Chief Educational Officer. In this regard the learned counsel also relied on the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.35180 of 2024 dated 03.12.2024, which according to the petitioner is an identical case, where this Court set aside the similar impugned order and remanded the matter back to the competent authority to pass orders in accordance with law.
3. The learned Special Government Pleader fairly concede that the issue dealt in W.P.No.35180 of 2024 is identical to that of the present writ petition. For ready reference it would be appropriate to extract the relevant portion of the order in W.P.No.35180 of 2024, dated 03.12.2024; the relevant paragraphs are paragraph Nos. 4,5 and 6, which reads as follows: 3/6
4. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the impugned order has been passed by the 3rd respondent only on merits. Since the competent Authority is 2nd respondent, the matter may be remanded back to the authorities concerned to pass appropriate orders on merits.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and this Court has perused the materials available on record carefully.
6. Considering the fact that the impugned order has been passed by the 3rd respondent, but the competent authority to grant approval for appointment of B.T.(Assistant) Teacher is 2nd respondent, the matter is remanded back to the 2nd respondent for fresh consideration and the 2nd respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4. From the ratio of the above order, it is amply clear that the second respondent is the competent authority to consider such proposal. In view of the same, by applying the ratio of the above order, the impugned order passed by the third respondent is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the second respondent, to consider the proposal afresh according to its own merits and in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4/6
5. In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Consequently the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
12.06.2025 smn Index : Yes/No Speaking order/non-speaking order To,
1. The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
2. The Chief Educational Officer, Thirupattur District, Thirupattur.
3. The District Educational Officer, Thirupattur District, Thirupattur.
3. The Correspondent Anaikar Oriental ( Arabic) Higher Secondary School, M.C. Road, Ambur - 635 802.
5/6
C.KUMARAPPAN, J., smn and W.M.P.No.23147 of 2025 12.06.2025 6/6