The Correspondent, v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.09.2020
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR and W.M.P(MD).Nos.10686 and 10669 of 2020 The Correspondent, Sacred Heart Higher Secondary School Panagudi 627 109 Tirunelveli District.
...Petitioner
-Vs1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep., by its Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai 600 006.
3.The Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
4.The District Educational Officer, Valliyoor 627 007 Tirunelveli District.
...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the fourth respondent District Educational Officer in O.Mu.No.3344/A2/2019, dated ....07.2020, quash the same and further direct the respondents herein to approve forthwith the appointment of C.Gnana Sekar as BT Assistant Science in the petitioner's school from the date of appointment i.e., 07.06.2017 and disburse annual increments and other allowances towards his salary w.e.f the said date. For Petitioner : Ms.A.Amala For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiyagarajan Government Advocate 1/4
ORDER
The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the fourth respondent District Educational Officer in O.Mu.No.3344/A2/2019, dated ....07.2020 quash the same and further, direct the respondents herein to approve forthwith the appointment of C.Gnana Sekar as BT Assistant Science in the petitioner's school from the date of appointment i.e., 07.06.2017 and disburse annual increments and other allowances towards his salary w.e.f the said date.
2.Heard Ms.A.Amala, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.Thiyagarajan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.
3.By consent of both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 4.That in the petitioner School, which is the Minority Recognized Aided School, there is a sanctioned post of B.T Assistant (Science), where C.Gnana Sekar was appointed on 07.06.2017 and on appointment, proposal for approval was sent by the petitioner School, which was considered by the District Educational Officer concerned in the month of September-2017. However, while approving the appointment of the said Teacher, only the Teacher grant was permitted and accordingly, the Teacher concerned get salary. However, his annual increment has not been sanctioned and therefore, it could not be paid to the Teacher concerned. 5.Therefore, in order to get the annual increment payable to the Teacher, the petitioner School made a request on 07.12.2019, which has been rejected by the fourth respondent vide impugned proceedings, dated ...07.2020. Challenging the same, the petitioner School has filed this writ petition.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, the reason cited in the impugned order cannot be sustained in view of the law having been declared by this Court and in this regard, the recent judgment of this Court, dated 13.08.2020 made in W.P(MD).No.9216 of 2020 in the matter of V.Fathima Riswana and two others Vs., The Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli and others, is heavily relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that, the Teacher concerned of the petitioner School since has not completed, admittedly, TET successfully, his appointment alone was approved with sanction of Teacher grants. Therefore, the said Teacher is not entitled to seek annual increment, accordingly, the said request made on behalf of the Teacher by the petitioner School was turned down by the fourth respondent through the impugned order. Hence, it does not require 2/4
any interference from this Court.
8.I have considered the said submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and perused the materials placed before this Court.
9.As has been rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the reason of want of TET qualification of the Teacher appointed in a Recognized Minority School for refusing or rejecting the claim of annual increment is unsustainable one, in view of the law having been declared by this Court in number of cases.
10.In this context, I had an occasion to consider the writ petition in W.P(MD).No.9216 of 2020, wherein by order dated 13.08.2020, I have considered all those aspects and the earlier order passed by this Court and ultimately, allowed the writ petition with the following order:
14. In view of the settled legal position, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the impugned order cannot be sustainable, therefore, it is liable to be quashed.
15. In the result, the impugned order is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondents, especially, the second respondent, who shall reconsider the issue and pass necessary orders for sanctioning the annual increment payable to these petitioners/teachers and accordingly calculate the same and be disbursed the arrears and continue to pay the increment as part of their service benefits. The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken by the respondents, especially, by the second respondent, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
16. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
11.In view of the said order, which was passed following number of earlier order passed in this regard, where, if a Teacher without TET qualification is appointed in a Minority School, it cannot stand in the way for the Teacher concerned to claim the service benefits. This Court, following the earlier orders, is inclined to pass the following order in this writ petition:
"that the impugned order for the reasons stated therein, cannot be sustained. Therefore, it is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondents, especially, the fourth respondent for reconsideration. While reconsidering the same, the fourth respondent shall pass necessary order allowing the annual increment payable to 3/4
the Teacher concerned as per the request of the petitioner and accordingly, the pay benefits payable to the Teacher concerned also be calculated and paid at the earliest point of time, preferrably, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." 12.With the aforesaid directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
Sd/ Assistant Registrar(CS-III) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS- ) 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 600 006.
3.The Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
4.The District Educational Officer, Valliyoor 627 007 Tirunelveli District.
+1 CC To M/s.Amala, Advocate in SR.No.17939 24.09.2020 rmk PK/18.01.2021 : 4P/6C 4/4