Thiru.T.K.M. Kailasam Pillai v. The District Elementary
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.04.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P.(MD)No.8166 of 2018 Thiru.T.K.M. Kailasam Pillai Middle School, Rep. by its Secretary, Thatchanallur, Tirunelveli District.
: Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District.
2. The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Palayamkottai Rural, Tirunelveli District.
: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to approve the appointment of Tmt.C.Rohini as Secondary Grade Teacher in the petitioner's school with effect from 01.06.2012 by considering the proposal and release the salary with effect from 01.06.2012.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Panneer Selvam For Respondents : Mrs.S.Srimathy, Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
************ By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2.The prayer sought for in this writ petition is for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to approve the appointment of Tmt.C.Rohini as Secondary Grade Teacher in the petitioner's school with effect from 01.06.2012 by considering the proposal and release the salary with effect from 01.06.2012.
3.Heard Mr.V.Panneer Selvam, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.S.Srimathy, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The grievance of the petitioner is that in the petitioner's school, one post of Secondary Grade Teacher was vacant, where one
C.Rohini was appointed on 01.06.2012 and the said appointment proposal was sent for approval to the respondents. However, the first respondent had returned the proposal on 18.12.2012, stating that TET qualification is must for the teacher to be appointed as the Secondary Grade Teacher.
5.Thereafter, rectifying the same, the petitioner had given revised or rectified proposal on 13.03.2013, to the respondents. However, the said revised / rectified proposal is yet to be approved or decided by the respondents and the same is said to be kept pending and therefore, if the said proposal sent on 13.03.2013, is directed to be considered and order to that effect is passed, the petitioner would be satisfied, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted.
6.I have heard the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, in this regard.
7.In view of the limited prayer sought for by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the following direction. 7.1.The re-submitted proposal after rectification dated 13.03.2013, regarding appointment of one C.Rohini at the petitioner school as Secondary Grade Teacher shall be considered by the first respondent and an order to that effect on merits and in accordance with law shall be passed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8.With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl.side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To
1. The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District.
2. The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Palayamkottai Rural, Tirunelveli District.
+ 1 CC TO Mr.V.PANNEER SELVAM, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 61947 MR TE/KKR/SAR-4 : 03/05/2018 : 2P/4C ORDER MADE IN W.P.(MD)No.8166 of 2018 16.04.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/