Madras High Court
The Secretary vs T.M.S.Santhi on 4 January, 2023
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 04.01.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
and
M.P(MD)No.2 of 2012
The Secretary,
Thiagarajan Higher Secondary School,
Vasanth Nagar,
Madurai-625 003. .. Appellant/4th Respondent
Vs.
1.T.M.S.Santhi
2.The Tamil Nadu Director of School Education,
College Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai- 625 002.
3.The Chief Educational Officer,
Tallakulam,
Madurai-625 002.
______________
Page No. 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
4.The District Educational Officer,
Tallakulam,
Madurai-625 002.
5.M.Kannan .. Respondents 1,2,3&5/
Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act,
against the order, dated 05.07.2011, made in W.P(MD)No.6230 of 2011.
For Appellant : Mr.Issac Mohanlal,
Senior Counsel
for Mr.L.Praveen Kumar
For Respondents : Ms.Anbarasi Dhanaseelan
for R1
: Mr.D.Sasikumar
Additional Government Pleader
for R2 to R4
: Mr.Sam Euhine Jebakumar
for R5
______________
Page No. 2 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
JUDGMENT
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
and
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
T.M.S.Santhi, wife of Late T.M.Sankarlal, came to this Court filing
W.P(MD)No.6230 of 2011 pray for issuance of writ of mandamus,
directing the Secretary, Thiagarajan Higher Secondary School, Madurai, to
consider her request for compassionate appointment in the post of Junior
Assistant since her husband, who was working in his school died in harness.
The matter was considered by this Court and a detailed order was passed
after giving opportunity to all the persons concerned, wherein the fourth
respondent school was directed to consider the case of the petitioner for
appointment to the post of Junior Assistant or any other suitable post in
vacancy forthwith (emphasis added). The educational authorities were also
directed to implement the scheme of the Government Order and the
instructions, in letter and spirit, taking note of the fact that the educational
authorities, at many times, failed to give effect to the scheme pertaining to
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
compassionate appointment. Being aggrieved by the said order, the fourth
respondent has preferred this Writ Appeal, which is now the subject matter
for consideration by this Court.
2. Earlier, the writ petitioner Santhi filed W.P.(MD)No.816 of 2010
to consider her representations dated 13.04.2007 and 10.09.2008. This
Court, by order dated 27.01.2010, has disposed the writ petition directing
the appellant herein to consider her representation. The writ petitioner
Santhi, while the direction of the Court was under consideration, moved the
High Court, filing W.P(MD)No.2029 of 2010 seeking direction to forbear
the appellant from filling up the post of Junior Assistant based on the paper
publication dated 20.01.2010 appeared in “Madurai Mani” daily newspaper.
The said writ petition was closed as infructuous when it was brought to the
notice of this Court that the petitioner is offered the post of 'Record Clerk'
in their school.
3. In such circumstances, it appears that the said Santhi, when
offered the post of 'Record Clerk', had her own apprehension that it is a
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
conditional appointment for a period of one year and since there is already a
post of Lab Assistant in the school in view of Clause 5 to the proceedings
dated 09.11.2010 issued by the Directorate of School Education, her
appointment will not be ratified by the Government. The self assumed
apprehension has made the petitioner desisting from joining the post of
Record Clerk offered by the appellant.
4. In this writ appeal, it is contended that the direction of the Single
Judge, overlooking the above fact, has directed the appellant to appoint the
writ petitioner in the post of Junior Assistant or any other suitable vacancy
forthwith, inspite of the fact that she was offered the post of Record Clerk,
which is appropriate to her qualification and kept vacant till date.
5. The learned counsel for the first respondent/writ petitioner would
submit that the School management, in order to deprive the lawful right and
the legitimate expectation accrued to her by virtue of the order passed by
the High Court, has offered the post of Record Clerk, which will not be
extended after one year and ratified by the Government in view of Clause 5.
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
For that reason, the writ petitioner was advised not to take up the post of
'Record Clerk'.
6. When the matter was taken up for consideration, this Court,
directed the appellant to indicate vacancy position and also the
appointments made during the pendency of the Appeal. Accordingly, the
appellant earlier filed an affidavit stating that there is no vacancy. However,
later, on proper legal advise, has come forward to offer the post of 'Record
Clerk', which is still vacant and also had issued an appointment order dated
23.12.2022. The appointment has been accepted by the first respondent/writ
petitioner and she has joined duty on 28.12.2022 as 'Record Clerk' in the
Appellant School.
7. The copy of the appointment order and joining report produced by
way of an additional typeset by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the appellant.
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
8. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/writ
petitioner still has apprehension in view of the fact that the approval granted
by the educational authorities vide proceedings dated 09.11.2010 is only for
a period of one year and subject to condition mentioned in Clause 4 and 5 of
the said proceedings.
9. This Court is of the view that such apprehension is only an
illusion. To disspell the said apprehension, we are inclined to make a
specific direction to the Director of School Education.
10. Accordingly, the appellant School management is directed to
forward the proposal, within seven days from today, to the District
Educational Officer for ratifying the appointment of the first respondent
Santhi as 'Record Clerk'. The Director of School Education is directed to
take note of the pendency of the litigation before this Court for all these
years, the effect of his proceedings dated 09.11.2010 shall be in force and
the appointment of the first respondent/writ petitioner as 'Record Clerk' in
the school managed by the appellant on 23.12.2022 be ratified without any
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
further delay, preferably, within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order.
11. With the above observation and direction, this writ appeal is
disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
[G.J.,J.] & [S.M.,J.]
04.01.2023
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
PJL
To
1.The Tamil Nadu Director of School Education,
College Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai- 625 002.
2.The Chief Educational Officer,
Tallakulam,
Madurai-625 002.
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
3.The District Educational Officer,
Tallakulam,
Madurai-625 002.
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
and
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
PJL
W.A(MD)No.127 of 2012
and
M.P(MD)No.2 of 2012
04.01.2023
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
