R.Jeyarani v. The Chief Education Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 04/11/2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU and W.M.P(MD).Nos.22528 and 22529 of 2025 R.Jeyarani, ... Petitioner Vs
1. The Chief Education Officer, O/o the Chief Educational Officer, Madurai District..
2. The District Educational Officer (Secondary Education), O/o the District Education Officer, Madurai District..
3. The Correspondent, Pasumalai Higher Secondary School, Pasumalai, Madurai 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 order passed by the 1/6
second respondent in his proceedings in Oo. Muu.No.5499/Aa5/2025 dated 04.09.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially directing the respondents to approve the appointment of Petitioner in the post of B.T. Assistant in the 3rd Respondent school w.e.f 17.06.2015 and consequentially to direct the respondents to approve the sanction of selection grade to the petitioner in the post of B.T. Assistant w.e.f. 17.06.2025 with all attendant, service and monetary benefits. For Petitioner : Mr. Jasima Yasmin For Respondents : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The writ petition had been filed challenging the order rejecting approval of the sanction of selection grade to the petitioner in the post of BT Assistant (Maths).
2. The petitioner had been originally appointed as a BT Assistant (Maths) in the third respondent school on 15.06.2015. The original proposal submitted by the third respondent had been rejected by the second respondent on the ground that the petitioner did not possess the TET qualification. The said rejection was challenged by the petitioner by 2/6
filing a writ petition, in which an interim order was granted directing the second respondent to grant temporary approval and to pay salary from the date of her appointment, however, subject to the result of the SLP pending consideration in Ashwinithanappan vs. Director of Education and another.
3. According to the petitioner, on completion of 10 years of service, she is entitled to be conferred with selection grade. Therefore, a proposal had been submitted, however, the same had been rejected on the ground that the petitioner's original appointment had not been approved on a permanent basis.
4. It is to be noted that the Honourable Apex Court, in the judgment rendered in the Paramathi case, held that the requirement of TET qualification cannot be applied to minority institutions. The said judgment has also been referred to a Larger Bench and the matter is pending consideration before the Honourable Apex Court. Further, the Government has taken a policy decision to approve all appointments of teachers who were appointed without TET qualification prior to 3/6
13.01.2023, subject to the outcome of the decision of the Honourable Apex Court in the Larger Bench.
5. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be conferred with selection grade on completion of ten years from the date of her initial appointment. Hence, the writ petition stands allowed and the impugned order is set aside and there shall be a direction to the respondents to approve the sanction of selection grade to the petitioner in the post of BT Assistant (Maths) with effect from 17.06.2025, with all monetary and other attendant benefits. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. 04.11.2025 TTA 4/6
TO
1. The Chief Education Officer, O/o the Chief Educational Officer, Madurai District..
2. The District Educational Officer (Secondary Education), O/o the District Education Officer, Madurai District..
3. The Correspondent, Pasumalai Higher Secondary School, Pasumalai, Madurai District..
5/6
K.KUMARESH BABU,J TTA
ORDER
IN WP(MD) No.29060 of 2025 Date : 04/11/2025 6/6