Madras High Court
Jothi Higher Secondary School vs The Director Of School Education on 21 September, 2021
W.P.(MD) Nos.18629 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 21.09.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
W.P.(MD) No.18629 of 2020
and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.15584 & 15585 of 2020
Jothi Higher Secondary School
Narimedu
Madurai
rep.by its Correspondent R.Arun ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Director of School Education
O/o.The Directorate of School Education
DPI Compound, College Road
Chennai-6
2.The Chief Educational Officer
O/o.The Chief Educational Officer
Madurai, Madurai District
3.The District Educational Officer
O/o.The District Educational Officer
Melur, Madurai District ... Respondents
____________
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) Nos.18629 of 2020
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue
a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the
impugned order issued by the third respondent in his proceedings in e.f.vz;.
3523/M4/2020, dated 24.10.2020 and quash the same as illegal and
consequentially to direct the third respondent to approve the appointment of
S.Vallinayaki as B.T.Assistant (Science) w.e.f.02.03.2020 with all other
attendend monetary benefits within the period stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar.C.
For M/s.Ajmal Associates
For Respondents : Mr.Veera.Kathiravan
Additional Advocate General
assisted by Mr.S.Shanmugavel
Government Counsel
ORDER
The prayer in this writ petition is for issuance of a writ of
certiorarified mandamus to quash the order, dated 24.10.2020, passed by the
third respondent and to direct the third respondent to approve the
appointment of S.Vallinayaki as B.T.Assistant (Science) with effect from
02.03.2020 with all other attendant monetary benefits, within the period
stipulated by this Court.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) Nos.18629 of 2020
2. According to the petitioner, their School is a Minority Aided
School. On 02.03.2020, they appointed one Vallinayaki as B.T.Assistant
(Science) in the vacancy arose due to the superannuation of one Jeyaraman,
B.T.Assistant (Science). Thereafter, on 13.03.2020, they submitted a proposal
to the third respondent seeking approval for the appointment of the said
Vallinayaki as B.T.Assistant (Science). However, the third respondent has
returned the proposal stating that the approval as sought for would be
considered after deployment of surplus teachers, if any. Challenging the
same, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that the impugned order was passed based on the G.O.Ms.No.165, dated
17.09.2019 and the said Government Order was passed based on the interim
order, dated 09.04.2019 in W.A.(MD) No.76 of 2019. Thereafter, the said writ
appeal was taken up for final disposal and the same was disposed by
Judgment dated 31.03.2021. Therefore, the impugned order dated
23.12.2020 is liable to be set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioner
would further submit that there is no surplus teacher in the petitioner School
and the reason as stated in the impugned order is unsustainable in the light
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) Nos.18629 of 2020
of the final orders passed in the aforesaid writ appeal and therefore, prayed for
setting aside of the impugned order.
4. Heard Mr.Veera.Kathiravan, learned Additional Advocate
General, assisted by Mr.S.Shanmugavel, learned Government Counsel,
appearing for the respondents on the above submissions.
5. On perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that the proposal
submitted by the petitioner School seeking approval for appointment of one
Vallinayaki as B.T.Assistant (Science) was returned stating that after
deployment of surplus teachers, approval sought for would be granted.
Therefore, the petitioner School has to make necessary explanation before the
third respondent regarding compliance with the conditions as required for
approving the post of B.T.Assistant.
6. In the result,
(i) The writ petition is allowed;
(ii) The impugned order dated 24.10.2020 is quashed;
(iii) The matter is remitted back to the file of the third
respondent for fresh consideration;
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) Nos.18629 of 2020
(iv) The petitioner School is directed to make
explanation before the third respondent regarding
compliance with the conditions as required for
approving the post of B.T.Assistant forthwith.
(v) If any such explanation is submitted, the third
respondent shall consider the same and pass
orders on merits and in accordance with law,
within a period of twelve weeks thereafter.
(vi) No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
21.09.2021
(2/3)
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
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.
krk
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) Nos.18629 of 2020
To:
1.The Director of School Education,
O/o.The Directorate of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai-6.
2.The Chief Educational Officer,
O/o.The Chief Educational Officer,
Madurai, Madurai District.
3.The District Educational Officer,
O/o.The District Educational Officer,
Melur, Madurai District.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) Nos.18629 of 2020
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
krk
W.P.(MD) Nos.18629 of 2020
and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.15584 & 15585 of
21.09.2021
(2/3)
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
