Madras High Court
The Chief Educational Officer vs P.Heubert Immanel ... 1St on 22 December, 2021
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22 .12.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
and
C.M.P(MD)Nos.8420 and 8421 of 2021
W.A(MD)No.1910 of 2021:
1.The Chief Educational Officer,
Virudhunagar District.
2.The District Educational Officer,
Virudhunagar District.
... Appellant / Respondents 1 and 2
Vs.
1.P.Heubert Immanel ... 1st Respondent/1st Writ Petitioner
2.The Secretary,
S.H.N.Edwardd Higher Secondary School,
Sattur,
Virudhunagar District. ... 2nd respondent/3rd respondent
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent,
against the order dated 14.07.2021 in W.P(MD)No.11759 of 2021.
For Appellants : Mr.P.Subbaraj,
Special Government Pleader
For R-1 : Mr.V.Panneerselvam
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
W.A(MD)No.1911 of 2021:
1.The Chief Educational Officer,
Virudhunagar District.
2.The District Educational Officer,
Virudhunagar District. ... Appellant / Respondents 1 and 2
Vs.
1.N.Yoburaja ... 1st Respondent/1st Writ Petitioner
2.The Secretary,
S.H.N.Edwardd Higher Secondary School,
Sattur,
Virudhunagar District.
... 2nd respondent/3rd respondent
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent,
against the order dated 14.07.2021 in W.P(MD)No.11760 of 2021.
For Appellants : Mr.P.Subbaraj,
Special Government Pleader
For R-1 : Mr.V.Panneerselvam
COMMON JUDGMENT
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
The Writ Appeals are preferred by the Government against the
order passed in W.P(MD)Nos.11759 and 11760 of 2011.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
2. The writ petitions were filed by the Teachers assailing the
order passed by the first appellant dated 03.11.2020 and to direct
the appellants to approve the appointment of the writ petitioners as
B.T. Assistants(English) from the date of appointment viz.,
03.01.2019. The writ petitioners who are the first respondent in the
writ appeals have passed B.A., (English) and B.Ed., (English) and
qualified for the post of B.T. Assistant(English). The second
respondent School is a Government non-minority aided school. The
said school called for applications to fill up the post of B.T.
Assistant(English). In response, the writ petitioners had applied and
they were selected and appointed as B.T. Assistants by order dated
03.01.2019. Both the writ petitioners were appointed in the
permanent sanctioned vacancy that arose due to the retirement of a
Secondary Grade Teacher on 31.05.2018 and promotion of a
Secondary Grade Teacher on 02.07.2018 respectively. Rule 15(4)
of the Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools(Regulation) Rules,
mandates the management of the school to get prior permission
from the appellants to fill up the post. Therefore, the school
management had sent the proposal to the first appellant to fill up
the post of B.T. Assistant(English). The second respondent school
while appointing the Teachers in the sanctioned vacancy has to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
follow certain conditions viz., (i) communal roster system should be
followed as per the procedure laid down in
G.O.Ms.No.241 dated 20.10.2007; (ii) Appointment should be
made as per the terms contemplated under the Right to Compulsory
Education Act, 2009; and (iii) the Teacher should have passed the
Teacher's Eligibility Test (TET) (hereinafter referred to as TET). As
the posts mentioned above are coming under 'BC' category, the
appellants granted prior permission to fill up the post of B.T.
Assistant by upgrading the Secondary Grade Teacher Post as B.T.
Assistant. It is also not in dispute that at the time of granting
permission, the appellants had verified all the documents and
granted approval. In spite of the same, order of approval was not
passed. Therefore, the writ petitioners filed W.P(MD)Nos.5440 and
5464 of 2020 seeking a Mandamus to approve the appointment.
While the said writ petitions were pending, the impugned order of
rejection of the proposal was passed on the ground of surplus
Teachers working in some other schools by referring to G.O.Ms.No.
165 School Education Department dated 17.09.2009. The
impugned order also referred to the interim order granted by this
Court in W.A(MD)No.76 of 2019 batch. Aggrieved by the order of
rejection of the approval, the writ petitions were filed which were
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
allowed by the writ Court. The above writ appeals are directed
against the said order.
3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
appellants submitted that the second respondent school is a
minority Educational Institution whereas it is a non minority aided
school. The impugned order itself was passed only based on
G.O.Ms.No.165 School Education Department dated 17.09.2019 and
the interim order passed in the W.A(MD)No.76 of 2019 etc., batch.
Before the Writ Court could pass the final order, the writ appeal
batch was heard in which the above referred G.O.Ms.No.165 School
Education Department dated 17.09.2019, was said to be
inoperative.
4. In view of the above, the Writ Court allowed the writ
petitions. In fact, before the Writ Court, the learned Government
Advocate had submitted that if the school submits the proposal, the
respondents 1 and 2, will pass orders following the directions issued
by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A(MD)No.76 of 2019 etc.,
dated 31.03.2021. Based on the said submission, the first appellant
was directed to approve the appointment of the writ petitioners as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
B.T. Assistants and pass orders within a period of two weeks. It is
also not stated by the Government whether there were any surplus
Teacher and they were deployed. In the absence of any surplus
Teacher available, in the interest of the second respondent school as
well as the students, the Teachers already appointed should be
allowed to continue. Therefore, we see no reason to interfere with
the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
5. In view of the above, the writ appeals are dismissed. No
Costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
6. The appellants are directed to approve the appointment of
the writ petitioners within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
[P.S.N.,J] [P.V.,J.
22.12.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
pm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
Copy to:
1.The Chief Educational Officer,
Virudhunagar District.
2.The District Educational Officer,
Virudhunagar District.
Note :
In view of the present lock
down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of
the order may be utilized
for official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of
the order that is presented
is the correct copy, shall
be the responsibility of the
advocate / litigant
concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.
and
P.VELMURUGAN,J.
pm
JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A(MD)Nos.1910 and 1911 of 2021
22.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
