M.Thalitha Esther Rani v. The Secretary To Government
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 06-09-2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.17084 of 2018 M.Thalitha Esther Rani ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Secretary to Government, School Education Department, St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Director of School Education, College Road, DPI Campus, Chennai-600 006.
3.The District Educational Officer, Ponneri Post and Taluk, Ponneri 601 204, Thiruvallur District.
4.The Correspondent, Britannia High School, Padi, Chennai-600 050.
...
Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No. 79435/ D1/ E1/ 2015 dated 21.4.2016 and quash the same and direct the second respondent to disburse the salary for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher for the period from 4.8.1997 to 1.6.2003 with all terminal and monetary benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.J.S.Arunkumar For Respondents-1to3 : Mr.P.Raja, Government Advocate.
For Respondent-4 : No Appearance
O R D E R
The order passed by the Director of School Education in proceedings dated 21.4.2016 in respect of the rejection of her claim in payment of salary with effect from the date of her appointment, is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, states that she was initially appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher on 4.8.1997 with the fourth respondent-School, which is an Aided School and she was handling classes from VI to IX Standards.
3. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the approval was granted by the authority competent on 26.6.2003. However, the arrears of salary due to the writ petitioner from the date of her appointment has not been paid. The representation submitted by the writ petitioner in this regard was rejected by the Director of School Education in proceedings dated 21.4.2016 stating that the order passed by this Court in WP No.28647 of 2015 dated 11.9.2015 is not applicable to the writ petitioner. However, the matter went by way of an appeal before the Hon'ble Division Bench, in respect of other similar writ petitions, and the Hon'ble Division Bench passed an order in W.A.(MD) Nos.74 of 2015 and 957 of 2016 on 21.3.2018. The relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereunder:- "10.
The learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners relied on certain other orders passed by various single Benches including one of us (TSSJ) and on perusal of the same, we find that in none of those decisions, the full effect of G.O.Ms.No.155 and the conditions therein have been thoroughly examined. Apart from that, the decision in the case of Pallivasal Primary School has not been specifically noted. Therefore, we are of the considered view, that those decisions cannot be referred to advance the case of the respondents/writ petitioners, though some of them have attained finality. Needless to state that if there has been a wrong decision, it cannot be treated as precedent.
11.In the light of the above reasoning, we are of the considered view that the order passed by the Writ Court directing disbursement of salary from the date of original appointment, cannot be sustained, in
the light of explicit condition imposed in G.O.Ms.No.155, which was upheld by the Division Bench in a Public Interest Litigation. Thus, for the above reasons, the writ appeals filed by the department has to be allowed.
12.The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that though there were about 3000 Teachers who were appointed in such improper manner as of now 300 Teachers would be entitled to monetary benefits and as remaining persons were already paid and they were protected by the Divison Bench order from the effect of recovery, the learned counsel submitted that the respondent should be permitted to approach the Government by way of representation.
13.We make no positive observation on this request. But it is always open to the respondents/writ petitioners to approach the Government, if they so desire. For the above reasons, the writ appeals are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside and consequently, the writ petitions are dismissed. No Costs. Consequently M.P.(MD) Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 and C.M.P.(MD)No.5749 of 2016 are closed."
4. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench, cited supra, the case of the writ petitioner is to be reconsidered with reference to the facts and circumstances. Accordingly, the second respondent is directed to reconsider the case of the writ petitioner in the light of the judgment, cited supra, and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh representation and all other relevant documents along with the order passed in this writ petition.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar
Svn To 1.The Secretary to Government, School Education Department, St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Director of School Education, College Road, DPI Campus, Chennai-600 006.
3.The District Educational Officer, Ponneri Post and Taluk, Ponneri 601 204, Thiruvallur District.
+1cc to Mr.J.S.Arunkumar, Advocate Sr.61631 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.62125 WP 17084 of 2018 Gj[co] srg 18/09/2018