Madras High Court
The Correspondent vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 August, 2023
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 09.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
The Correspondent,
Holy Angel Higher Secondary School,
2-A, Kanagavel Colony,
Near Manianagaram, Madurai-625 001,
Madurai District. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented 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,
Madurai, Madurai District.
4.The District Educational Officer,
Madurai, 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 impugned proceedings issued by the fourth respondent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/10
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
District Educational Officer vide O.Mu.No.2527/A5/2020, dated 06.10.2020
quash the same and further direct the third respondent Chief Educational
Officer herein to approve forthwith he appointment of S.Bharathi as B.T
Assistant (Science) in the petitioner school with effect from 02.07.2018 with all
attendant benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Cibi Chakraborthy
For Respondents : Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam
Government Advocate
ORDER
The present writ petition is for a Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the fourth respondent
District Educational Officer vide O.Mu.No.2527/A5/2020, dated 06.10.2020
quash the same and further direct the third respondent Chief Educational
Officer herein to approve forthwith the appointment of S.Bharathi as B.T
Assistant (Science) in the petitioner school with effect from 02.07.2018 with all
attendant benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate for the respondents and carefully perused the materials
available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
3. The petitioner is a Minority Management School. A post of B.T
Assistant (Science) fell vacant in the petitioner School on 01.07.2018 due to the
retirement of the previous incumbent D.Sathyavathi on 30.06.2018. In that
vacancy, the petitioner School appointed a fully qualified candidate, namely,
S.Bharathi as B.T. Assistant (Science) with effect from 02.07.2018. Thereafter,
the petitioner School submitted necessary proposal to the Chief Educational
Officer seeking approval of the appointment by the proposal, dated 05.07.2018
and the same was submitted through proper channel, that is, the fourth
respondent District Educational Officer. However, after two years from the date
of appointment, the fourth respondent vide the impugned proceedings, dated
06.10.2020 refused to approve the appointment by relying upon the interim
order, dated 09.04.2019 passed by this Court in a batch of writ petitions in
W.A(MD)Nos.76 of 2018 etc., and on the basis of G.O(Ms)No.165 of 2019 of
the School Education Department, dated 17.09.2019 which was issued pursuant
to the order passed by this Court in a batch of writ petitions in W.A(MD)Nos.
76 of 2018 etc., dated 09.04.2019. Assailing the same, this writ petition came to
be filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon the order passed by
this Court in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.Nos.3194 of 2020 etc., dated
18.04.2022 wherein, a similar case was dealt with and favorable orders were
passed to the petitioner and the relevant portion of which is extracted as
follows:
“9. On perusal of the judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court in the aforesaid Batch of cases and also the G.O.Ms.No.165
issued by the School Education Department, dated 17.09.2019, both
the judgment as well as G.O.Ms.No.165 are prospective in nature.
The appointments made by the School Management in the instant
writ petitions are prior to the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.165 dated
17.09.2019 and proposals for the said appointment were also
forwarded to the educational authorities prior to the issuance of
G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.09.2019. Therefore, there is no legal
impediments for the respondents to accord approval to the
appointment made by the School Management in the instant writ
petitions.
10. Having regard to the rival submissions of the parties,
taking note of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this
Court in a Batch of Writ Appeals in W.A.(MD)No.76 of 2019, etc.,
G.O.Ms.No.165 issued by the School Education Department, dated
17.09.2019 will not prohibit the educational authorities to approve
the appointment made by the School Management in the instant writ
petitions since the proposals for approval of appointment made by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
the School Management were forwarded to the educational
authorities prior to the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.165 dated
17.09.2019. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the respondent
department without considering the G.O.Ms.No.165 dated
17.09.2019 in proper prospective and passed the impugned order
rejecting the proposals submitted by the School Management.
Therefore, the impugned orders passed by the respondent
department are liable to be quashed.
11. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed by the
respondent department in the aforesaid writ petitions are quashed
and remitted to the Chief Educational Officers / District
Educational Officers concerned, to consider and pass an order of
approval of the appointment made by the School Management,
provided the said proposals satisfies all the norms prescribed for
such appointments and as per the Rules, as expeditiously as
possible preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of the order.”
5. He also relied on another order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench
of this Court in W.A(MD)No.1479 of 2020, dated 12.12.2022. The relevant
portion of which is extracted as follows:
6. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent further submitted
that the proposal seeking approval of the appointment of the 1st
respondent/writ petitioner was submitted even before the date of
G.O.Ms.No.165, dated 17.09.2019 which was the subject matter of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
W.A(MD)No.76 of 2019 & etc, dated 31.03.2021. The said G.O is
having prospective effect only and therefore, there is no bar for
considering the proposal seeking approval of the 1st respondent's
appointment. In support of the said contention, the learned counsel
relied on an order passed in W.P(MD)No.3194 of 2020 etc., batch
dated 18.04.2022, wherein, it has been held as follows:-
''8. According to the learned Additional Advocate
General, the State Government has preferred an appeal
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to
Appeal (C) No.15702 of 2021 as against the judgment
passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the Batch of
Writ Appeals in W.A.(MD) No.76 of 2019, etc. and obtained
stay in sofar as Clause (i) of paragraph 95 of the said
judgment. Except the aforesaid clause (i) of paragraph 95,
there was no stay in respect of remaining portion of the
judgment. It is agreed by the learned Additional Advocate
General that the writ petitioners were appointed prior to the
G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.09.2019 and therefore, it can be
considered and an appropriate order may be passed.
9. On perusal of the judgment of the Division Bench
of this Court in the aforesaid Batch of cases and also the
G.O.Ms.No.165 issued by the School Education
Department, dated 17.09.2019, both the judgment as well as
G.O.Ms.No.165 are prospective in nature. The
appointments made by the School Management in the
instant writ petitions are prior to the issuance of
G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.09.2019 and proposals for the
said appointment were also forwarded to the educational
authorities prior to the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.165 dated
17.09.2019. Therefore, there is no legal impediments for the
respondents to accord approval to the appointment made by
the School Management in the instant writ petitions.
10. Having regard to the rival submissions of the
parties, taking note of the judgment passed by the Division
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
Bench of this Court in a Batch of Writ Appeals in W.A.(MD)
No.76 of 2019, etc., G.O.Ms.No.165 issued by the School
Education department, dated 17.09.2019 will not prohibit
the educational authorities to approve the appointment
made by the School Management in the instant writ
petitions since the proposals for approval of appointment
made by the School Management were forwarded to the
educational authorities prior to the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.
165 dated 17.09.2019. Therefore, this Court is of the view
that the respondent department without considering the
G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.09.2019 in proper perspective and
passed the impugned order rejecting the proposals
submitted by the School Management. Therefore, the
impugned orders passed by the respondent department are
liable to be quashed.
11. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed by the
respondent department in the aforesaid writ petitions are
quashed and remitted to the Chief Educational
Officers/District Educational Officers concerned, to
consider and pass an order of approval of the appointment
made by the School management, provided the said
proposals satisfies all the norms prescribed for such
appointments and as per the Rules, as expeditiously as
possible preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of the order. It is made clear that
those who are appointed to the post of B.T. Assistant and
Secondary Grade Teacher prior to the issuance of
G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.09.2019 and also, the proposals
for approval of the such appointments were forwarded to
the educational authorities prior to the issuance of
G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.09.2019 alone are entitled to the
relief granted hereinabove.''
7. At this juncture, learned Additional Advocate General
appearing for the appellants submitted that in the light of the
aforesaid order made in W.P(MD)No.3194 of 2020 etc., batch dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
18.04.2022, the order made in W.P(MD)No.20402 of 2021 dated
30.06.2022, requires modification as the learned Single Judge in
W.P(MD)No.20402 of 2021 dated 30.06.2022, has issued a positive
direction to approve the appointment of the 1st respondent/writ
petitioner.
8. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the
parties and perused the materials available on record.
9. In the present case, there is no dispute that the proposal
seeking to approve the appointment of the 1st respondent was made
on 30.08.2019. Therefore, considering the aforesaid rival
submissions and in the light of the order made in W.P(MD)No.3194
of 2020 etc., batch dated 18.04.2022, the order of the learned Single
Judge in W.P(MD)No.20402 of 2021 dated 30.06.2022, directing
the 1st appellant to pass appropriate orders approving the 1st
respondent's appointment as Post Graduate Assistant with effect
from 30.08.2019, is modified to the effect that the appellants shall
consider on merits and pass an order of approval of the
appointment of the 1st respondent made by the 2nd respondent school
management, provided, the proposal dated 30.08.2019 satisfies all
the norms prescribed for such appointment and the Rules
therefor........”
6. Since the date of appointment of the said Bharathi and the date of
proposal to approve her appointment are much before the date of G.O(Ms)No.
165, dated 17.09.2019, this Court is fully in consonance with the aforesaid
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
order and in line of the same, the impugned order, dated 06.10.2020 is hereby
quashed and the fourth respondent is directed to consider the proposal in the
light of the order passed by this Court in a batch of writ petitions in
W.P(MD)No.3194 of 2020 etc., dated 18.04.2022 within a period of twelve
(12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. This writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly. There shall be no
order as to costs.
09.08.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
BTR
To
1.The Secretary,
The 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,
Madurai, Madurai District.
4.The District Educational Officer,
Madurai, Madurai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
BTR
W.P.(MD).No.15329 of 2020
09.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
