Madras High Court
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs J.Mahalingam on 5 July, 2023
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017 and 369 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.07.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017 & 369 of 2019
and C.M.P.No.4794 of 2017 and 3613 of 2019
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
represented by its Principal Secretary
to Government, School Education Department
Fort St.George, Chennai.
2.The Director of Elementary Education
College Road, Chennai.
3.The District Elementary Educational Officer
Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. .... Appellants in both W.As.
Vs
W.A.No.320 of 2017
1.J.Mahalingam
2.Correspondent
Udankudy Saiva Prasasa Vidyasalai
Middle School, Tuticorin-628 703. .... Respondents in WA 320/2017
W.A.No.369 of 2019
1.K.Parvathy
2.The Secretary
Hindu Middle School
Madathur, Gunaramanallur Post
Tenkasi Taluk, Tirunelveli District. .... Respondents in WA 369/2019
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017 and 369 of 2019
Prayer in W.A.No.320/2017 : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order dated 23.12.2014 made in W.P.No.33248 of 2014.
Prayer in W.A.No.320/2017 : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order dated 23.12.2014 made in W.P.No.33246 of 2014.
In both W.As.
For Appellants : Mr.N.Murali
Government Advocate
For Respondents : No appearance
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. SURESH KUMAR, J.)
Since the issue raised in both the appeals is one and the same, with the consent
of the learned counsel on either side, these appeals are taken up together and disposed
of by this common judgment.
2. The respondents were appointed as Secondary Grade Teachers in aided private
schools, who are the party respondents in the writ petitions, sometime prior to
19.05.1998. It is to be noted that those teachers, though had been appointed to the
post of Secondary Grade Teachers, they had higher qualifications like B.Ed or Tamil
Pandit. However, in that capacity they had been working continuously. Subsequently,
when the Schools they were working sent the proposal for the approval of their
appointment to the competent authority ie., the Education Department, that has not
been approved and was rejected. Therefore, it triggered the writ petitioners /
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017 and 369 of 2019
respondents herein to file writ petitions in W.P.Nos.33246 and 33248 of 2014
respectively.
3. The said two writ petitions were heard together along with two connected writ
petitions and a common order was passed on 23.12.2014, where those writ petitions
were allowed. Aggrieved over the same, the present intra court appeals have been filed.
4. Heard Mr.N.Murali learned Government Advocate appearing for the appellants,
who would submit that, insofar as these teachers are concerned, admittedly they did not
have the qualification of Secondary Grade Teacher at the time of their appointment in
the respective schools and it has been held that in order to hold the post of Secondary
Grade Teacher, one must have the Secondary Grade Teacher Education Certificate,
which is a special qualification. Therefore, mere having any other qualification like B.Ed
or Tamil Pandit, cannot be treated as higher qualification and it is only a different
qualification. Therefore, by having such different qualification, one cannot be permited
to work as Secondary Grade Teachers, as Secondary Grade Teachers mainly deal with
the students upto 3rd standard. Therefore, child psychology being one of the important
subject should have been taught to them and therefore such kind of training would be
possible in secondary grade teacher training, which admittedly they do not have.
Therefore, they are not eligible for the secondary grade teachers and their appointment
as secondary grade teachers in the aided schools concerned cannot be approved and
that was the stand taken by the appellant before the writ Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017 and 369 of 2019
5. Learned Government Advocate would further submit that these factual aspects
have not been considered in proper perspective by the learned Judge who dealt with the
writ petitions and ultimately allowed the writ petitions by taking into account the earlier
writ petitions which were allowed.
6. Learned Government Advocate would also submit that, insofar as the earlier
orders which have been taken as precedence in passing the impugned order, those
orders might have been passed before the Government had come forward to issue
G.O.Ms.No.559 and 155 and therefore, those orders cannot be taken as a precedence to
allow these writ petitions also. Hence, the learned Government Advocate, on that
ground, wants the interference of this Court against the order impugned.
7. We have considered the said submissions made by the learned Government
Advocate for the appellants and have perused the materials that have been placed
before this Court.
8. Insofar as the holding the post of secondary grade teachers is concerned, no
doubt, one must have the secondary grade teacher education certificate, which is a
special qualification meant for that post alone. Merely having higher qualifications like
B.Ed or Tamil Pandit or M.Ed cannot be treated as higher qualification, but it can only be
treated as different qualification as has been held by the Division Bench of this Court
long back.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017 and 369 of 2019
9. However, this issue of appointing of B.Ed qualified persons or Tamil Pandits as
secondary grade teachers, had engaged various Division Benches of this Court, where
ultimately a Division Bench has passed an order on 29.06.2001, whereby a set of
directions had been given. Out of which, one important direction that was given by the
Division Bench was that, the teachers who have been appointed in the secondary grade
vacancies without the secondary grade teacher education qualification, but with other
qualification like B.Ed or Tamil Pandit etc., are concerned, their appointment, if it is
made between 11.07.1995 and 19.05.1998, they can be permitted to continue in the said
post, provided those teachers must be sent for a short term training of secondary grade
teacher education and after completing the training, their services can be regularised or
approved and they can be permitted to continue in the said post.
10. In fact, pursuant to the said order of this Court, the Government has come
forward to issue a Government Order, viz., G.O.Ms.No.155, Education Department dated
03.10.2002, wherein Clause (xi) reads thus,
" (xi) After 19.05.1998, the graduate teachers appointed in the post of
Secondary Grade Teachers, such appointments will not be accepted."
11. As per the said Government Order, those who had been appointed as
secondary grade teachers with other qualification on or before 19.05.1998 are eligible to
continue in the said post, provided they should have undergone a short term training in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017 and 369 of 2019
secondary grade teacher education course. Those who had been appointed without
such a qualification of secondary grade teacher training / education in the post of
secondary grade teachers after 19.05.1998, their appointment need not be approved.
This position since has been clarified by the Division Bench, it has been accepted by the
appellant Department and they issued G.O.Ms.No.155 as stated supra.
12. Insofar as the respondent teachers are concerned, they were appointed well
prior to 19.05.1998. This has been found out by the learned Judge in the impugned
order itself. When that being so, merely because they were having only different
qualification and they did not have secondary grade teacher education qualification,
their appointment cannot be rejected. Instead, they could have been sent for short term
training and after they successfully completed their training, their appointment could
have been approved. Since the same has not been done, these teachers approached
the writ Court, where the learned Judge, taking note of the earlier orders, where series
of orders were passed by this Court, including various Division Benches of this Court, has
ultimately allowed the said writ petitions, stating the following.
" Pursuant to the order passed by the Division Bench G.O.Ms.No.155
dated 03.10.2002 was issued wherein clause xi of the Government Order
states that the appointment made after 19.05.1998 by the institutions
would not be approved. Admittedly, the petitioner's appointments were
made prior to the cut off date. Therefore, at this distance of time stating
that prior approval was not obtained from the Department before filling
up
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017 and 369 of 2019
the vacancies, cannot be raised. Further, the petitioners in W.P.Nos.19821
of 2003 etc., batch have been granted the relief and the respondent
Department has implemented the order dated 22.01.2013. Thus, taking
into consideration of the above facts, the issue involved in these writ
petitions is squarely covered by the earlier decisions of this Court, referred
supra, which was rendered following the order passed by the Hon'ble
Division Bench.
9. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed as prayed for. No costs."
13. These factual findings given by the learned Judge cannot be disputed by the
appellant Department, as the teachers were appointed well prior to the cut off date of
19.05.1998 and therefore, they are entitled to continue in the said post of secondary
grade teachers provided they acquired the short term training, for which they could have
been sent.
14. When that being the position, the appellant Department / Government cannot
have any specific grievance over the said order passed by the writ Court, which is
impugned herein dated 23.12.2014. Therefore, we do not find any error in the order
passed by the learned Judge which is impugned herein. As a result, the writ appeals fail
and are accordingly dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are also dismissed.
(R.S.K.,J.) (V.L.N.J,.)
05.07.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation / Yes/No
KST
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017 and 369 of 2019
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
AND
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
KST
W.A.Nos.320 of 2017
and 369 of 2019
05.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
