The Manager v. The District Educational Officer (Elementary)
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU W.P.(MD)No.2853 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.2004 of 2025 The Manager, Gandhiji Memorial Primary School, Velarkulam, Pappakudi Union, Tirunelveli District.
...Petitioner
Vs 1.The District Educational Officer (Elementary), Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
2.The Block Educational Officer, Pappakudi Range, Pappakudi, Tirunelveli District.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order in O.Mu.No. 1231/A1/2024 dated 20/12/2024 of the second respondent herein and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 herein to approve the appointment of Mrs.K.A.Kalaivani as a Primary School Headmaster in the petitioner school w.e.f. 10/06/2024 with all other attended benefits and pass such further or other orders as this 1/5
Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Pon Ramkumar For Respondents : Mr.F.Deepak Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order in O.Mu.No.1231/A1/2024 dated 20.12.2024 of the second respondent herein and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 herein to approve the appointment of Mrs.K.A.Kalaivani as a Primary School Headmaster in the petitioner school w.e.f. 10/06/2024 with all other attended benefits.
2. The challenge in the writ petition is with regard to the return of the proposal for the appointment made to the post of Headmistress in the petitioner School, which was returned on the ground that the incumbent, who had been appointed did not possess TET qualification and further particulars had also been called for.
2/5
3. It is to be noted that the requirement of TET in respect of minority institutions has been finally decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pramati. However, the issue has now been referred to a Larger Bench before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and is pending consideration. The Division Bench of this Court by its order dated 10.09.2025, has categorically held that the view made in the case of Pramati continues to apply until it is modified in any way by the Larger Bench.
4. This Court in similar circumstances had directed the respondents to grant approval subject to the result of the decision of the Larger Bench with a further direction to release the salary from the date of the order and arrears, if any, subject to the result of the Larger Bench issue.
5. In such view of the matter, the return noting the incumbent did not possess TET alone is set aside and the petitioner is directed to resubmit the proposal seeking approval of the appointment of Headmistress to its school. On receipt of such proposal, without insisting on TET qualification, the respondents are directed to grant approval to 3/5
the petitioner and to disburse the grant in aid salary from the date of the order, subject to the further requirements being satisfied by the petitioner. It is made clear that, depending upon the orders passed by the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner would be entitled to arrears of salary as per grant in aid and other attendant benefits from the date of the initial appointment.
6. The writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 19.11.2025 NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no Sn To:
1.The District Educational Officer (Elementary), Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
2.The Block Educational Officer, Pappakudi Range, Pappakudi, Tirunelveli District.
4/5
K.KUMARESH BABU , J.
Sn 19.11.2025 5/5