The Correspondent v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.04.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA W.P.(MD) No.10164 of 2024 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.9189 & 9190 of 2024 The Correspondent St. James High School, Valiyavilai - 629 57, Kanyakumari District.
... Petitioner Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 009.
1/9
3.The Chief Educational Officer Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District.
4.The District Educational Officer, Marthandam, Kanyakumari District.
....Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent Chief Educational Officer in Mu.Mu.No.1765/Ee4/ 2019, dated 17.11.2021, quash the same and further direct the 3rd and 4th respondents to approve forthwith the appointment of M.Mini as B.T Assistant (Science) in the petitioner's school w.e.f. The date of her appointment viz., 08.06.2017, with all attendant benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance. 2/9
For Petitioner : Ms.M.F.Rooshi Maas for M/s.Isaac Chambers For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjadkhan Government Advocate
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent Chief Educational Officer in Mu.Mu.No.1765/Ee4/2019, dated 17.11.2021, quash the same and further direct the 3rd and 4th respondents to approve forthwith the appointment of M.Mini as B.T Assistant (Science) in the petitioner's school w.e.f. The date of her appointment viz., 08.06.2017, with all attendant benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.
2. Heard Ms.M.F.Rooshi Maas, learned counsel representing for M/s.Isaac Chambers for the petitioner and 3/9
Mr.T.Amjadkhan, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 4.
3. By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
4. The petitioner-school has appointed one M.Mini as a B.T Assistant (Science) on 08.06.2017. Thereafter, proposal was sent to the Government for approval and the same was pending. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking direction to consider the proposals sent by the Government and pass orders by the respondents. Consequently, an order has been passed on 17.11.2021 stating that the petitioner school comes under the Corporate Management administered by the Syro Malabar Catholic Diocese of Thuckalay, under which there was a surplus post and hence, the approval was rejected.
5. But the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted 4/9
that as per the settled decision of this Court dated 31.03.2021 in W.A.(MD)No.76 of 2019 etc., batch, the above G.O.(Ms)No.165 is not applicable to the case of the petitioner.
6. When similar issue came up for consideration before this Court in W.P(MD)No.7479 of 2024 dated 17.04.2024, the following order has been passed :
"5. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.09.2019 has been kept inoperative in W.A.(MD).No.76 of 2019 batch dated 31.03.2021 in the case of The Secretary to Government Government of Tamil Nadu School Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 9 vs Iruthaya Amali and the relevant portion of the order is extracted hereunder:
"95. In view of the aforesaid discussions, we are inclined to pass the following orders in this batch of cases :
...........
(o) In view of the aforesaid, the 5/9
G.O.Ms.No.165, School Education [Tho.Ka.2(1)] Department, dated 17.09.2019 is hereby declared to be inoperative."
6. The petitioner's appointment has been made prior to the order dated 31.03.2021 passed in W.A.(MD).No.76 of 2019 batch. Hence, the petitioner School gets the advantage of getting approval of the appointment of Sunitha as B.T.Assistant Maths. Therefore, the respondents cannot decline the approval of the appointment for the reasons of TET eligibility or for deployment of the alleged surplus.
7. In view of the above stated reasons, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 08.09.2020 is set aside. The respondents 3 and 4 are directed to consider and pass orders regarding approval of appointment of Sunitha as B.T.Assistant Maths with effect from 01.08.2017. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a 6/9
copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed."
8. In view of the above stated reasons and the decision rendered by this Court in the aforesaid writ appeal and writ petition, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned proceeding of the third respondent dated 17.11.2021 is set aside. The respondents 3 and 4 are directed to consider and pass orders regarding approval of appointment of M.Mini as BT Assistant (Science) in the petitioner's school with effect from 08.06.2017. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
25.04.2024 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No RM 7/9
To 1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Chief Educational Officer Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District.
4.The District Educational Officer, Marthandam, Kanyakumari District.
8/9
R.N.MANJULA , J.
RM W.P.(MD)No.10164 of 2024 (2/2) 25.04.2024 9/9