Ananthi.V v. The Secretary To The Government

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:03.02.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.M.P(MD).Nos.10133 and 10134 of 2021 V.Ananthi ... Petitioner in W.P(MD).No.13104 of 2021 P.Arul Maniraj ... Petitioner in W.P(MD).No.13106 of 2021 Vs.

1.The Secretary to the Government, Department of School Education, St.George Fort, Chennai.

2.The Director of School Education, DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai.

3.The Chief Educational Officer, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.

4.The District Educational Officer, Tenkasi District, Tirunelveli.

1/6

5.The Correspondent, Baren Bruck Higher Secondary School, Bungalow Surandai, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents in both petitions Prayer in W.P(MD).No.13104 of 2021:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 3 and 4 to approve the appointment of the petitioner as B.T.Assistant Teacher in the fifth respondent School from the date of appointment (i.e.,) from 01.07.2019 and confer all the consequential benefits.

Prayer in W.P(MD).No.13106 of 2021:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 3 and 4 to approve the appointment of the petitioner as B.T.Assistant Teacher in the fifth respondent School from the date of appointment (i.e.,) from 01.08.2019 and confer all the consequential benefits.

In both cases For Petitioner : Mr.S.Chellapandian For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok, Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R4 Mr.P.P.Alwin Balan for R5 2/6

C O M M O N O R D E R These Writ Petitions have been filed to direct the respondents 3 and 4 to approve the appointments of the petitioners as B.T.Assistant Teachers in the fifth respondent School from the date of their appointments and confer all the consequential benefits.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were appointed as B.T.Assistant Teachers in the fifth respondent School and the fifth respondent School has forwarded a proposal for approving the appointments of the petitioners. However, the same was not considered. Hence, the present writ petitions have been filed.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the Official respondents would submit that already the proposal sent by the fifth respondent School was rejected by the Official respondents on 27.08.2019.

3/6

4. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the rejection order passed by the Official respondents has not been furnished to the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent.

6. In view of the submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4, nothing survives for adjudication in the present writ petitions. However, the Official respondents are directed to furnish the rejection order to the petitioners to enable them to work out their remedies in the manner known to law.

4/6

7. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 03.02.2023 ssb NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No To:

1.The Secretary to the Government, Department of School Education, St.George Fort, Chennai.

2.The Director of School Education, DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai.

3.The Chief Educational Officer, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.

4.The District Educational Officer, Tenkasi District, Tirunelveli.

5.The Correspondent, Baren Bruck Higher Secondary School, Bungalow Surandai, Tirunelveli District.

5/6

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

ssb 03.02.2023 6/6