J.Wesley Prabhy, v. The District Educational
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.10.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.P.No.35858 of 2016 J.Wesley Prabhy ... Petitioner Vs.
1 The District Educational Officer Tiruvannamalai District.
2 The District Educational Officer Cuddalore District.
3 The Central Manager & Chairman Education Board, ALC Campus, Cuddalore.
4 The Correspondent Danish Mission High Secondary School Somasipadi, Thiruvannamalai District.
5 The Correspondent Danish Mission High Secondary School Panruti, Cuddalore District.
... Respondents Prayer:
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents directing to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.08.2015 for approval of the appointment of the petitioner as a secondary grade teacher in the 3rd respondent School with effect from date of initial
appointment with all service and monetary benefits in light of the judgment in Writ Appeal (MD).No.231 of 2006 (The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Education Department and other - VsS.Suganthi Victoria). For Petitioner : M/s.T.Dharani For Respondents : Mr.K.Dhananjayan Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2.The present writ petition has been filed seeking a Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.08.2015 for approval of the appointment of the petitioner as a Secondary Grade Teacher in the third respondent School with effect from the date of initial appointment with all service and monetary benefits in light of the judgment in Writ Appeal (MD).No.231 of 2006 (The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Education Department and other - Vs- S.Suganthi Victoria). 3.The petitioner would state that she was appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher in the fifth respondent School in the resultant vacancies caused by the transfer of one Mr.Kannady Jones Sekar subject to the selection as contemplated in the Rules with effect
from 01.08.1997. After appointment of the petitioner as a Secondary Grade Teacher, similarly placed persons approval had been rejected by the second respondent on 07.11.1997 on the ground that the Graduate Teachers cannot be appointed as Secondary Grade Teachers based on G.O.Ms.No.559, Education Department, dated 11.07.1995. The said Government Order had been challenged before this Court in a batch of cases and this Court vide order dated 29.06.2001 made in W.A.No.991 of 1999 etc., batch has protected the interest of the Teachers who had been appointed between 11.07.1995 and 19.05.1998.
4.The petitioner would further state that the first respondent had issued Government Orders in G.O.Ms.No.155, School Education Department dated 03.10.2002, whereby the Graduate Teachers, who had been appointed in the Secondary Grade posts had been directed to undergo Child Psychology Training for a period of one month and after completion of the training, the State Government had been directed to approve the appointment of the Teachers and the petitioner also underwent the training and after completion of the training, the petitioner's service was approved with effect from 02.06.2003 instead of 01.08.1997.
5.The petitioner would further state that the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.150, School Education Department dated 02.07.2007 extending the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.155, School Education Department dated 03.10.2002 to the persons appointed between 19.05.1998 and 29.06.2001 and hence, the respondents are liable to approve her appointment. The petitioner in this regard, made representation dated 20.08.2015 to the respondents and since it evoked no response, came forward to file this writ petition.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied upon a judgment of the Division Bench of the Madurai Bench of this Court dated 17.08.2006 made in Writ Appeal (MD).No.231 of 2006 (The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Education Department and others - Vs- S.Suganthi Victoria and another) and would submit that the Madurai Bench of this Court, in similar circumstance, has passed a positive order and further submitted that if a direction is given to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner in the light of the decision cited supra, that would suffice. 7.Heard the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader who takes notice for the respondents.
8.Considering the submissions made on either side and without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 20.08.2015, on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders in the light of the judgment of the Division Bench of the Madurai Bench of this Court dated 17.08.2006 made in Writ Appeal (MD).No.231 of 2006 (The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Education Department and others - Vs- S.Suganthi Victoria and another), within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9.It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the claim made by the petitioner and it is for the respondents to decide the matter, purely on merits. 10.The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. 07.10.2016 pri Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No
R.SUBBIAH,J.
pri To 1 The District Educational Officer Tiruvannamalai District.
2 The District Educational Officer Cuddalore District.
3 The Central Manager & Chairman Education Board, ALC Campus, Cuddalore.
4 The Correspondent Danish Mission High Secondary School Somasipadi, Thiruvannamalai District.
5 The Correspondent Danish Mission High Secondary School Panruti, Cuddalore District.
W.P.No.35858 of 2016 07.10.2016