Madras High Court
R.Chidambaram vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 7 July, 2023
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 07.07.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
1.R.Chidambaram
2.K.Annamalai
3.K.Amsaveni
4.R.Ravichandran
5.S.Anbukkarasu
6.T.Jestin Christopher
7.S.Saravanan
8.O.Anbuselvan
9.P.Sasikumar
10.V.Kongu
11.I.Sekar
12.P.Natarajan
13.N.Pounraj
14.G.Manimaran
15.S.Augustinal Stella
16.R.Muniyandi ... Appellants in W.A.No.220 of 2014
K.Bhavani ... Appellants in W.A.No.221 of 2014
Vs
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep., by its Secretary to Govt.,
School Education Department,
Page No.1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
Fort St., George, Chennai -9.
2.The Director of School Education,
College Road, Nungambakkam,
Chennai – 6.
3.The Director,
Teachers Recruitment Board,
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maligai,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 6. ... Respondents in both W.As.
COMMON PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent
against the order dated 30.09.2013 made in W.P.Nos.25945 & 25855 of
2013.
For Appellants : Ms.C.Uma
For Respondents : Mr.K.V.Sanjeev Kumar Spl.G.P for RR1 &2
No Appearance
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Order of the Court was made by Mr.R.SURESHKUMAR.,J.)
Since the issue raised in these appeals is one and the same, with the
consent of the learned counsels appearing for both sides, these Writ
Appeals were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
Page No.2/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
2.That the appellants having completed the Teacher Education
qualification to be considered for the appointment of Teachers whose names
have been sponsored by the employment exchange and the respondent
department verified the certificate of various candidates including the
appellants.
3.The certificate verification was taken place between 12.05.2010 and
15.05.2010.
4.Subsequently, the National Council for Teacher Education i.e.,
NCTE issued notification dated 23.08.2010, since the said NCTE has been
declared as an Academic Authority under the provisions of the Right to
Education Act, the qualification that one must have to become a Teacher
has been prescribed in the said notification, according to which, the teacher
who wants to be appointed, must have the qualification as prescribed by the
NCTE and also a qualification called Teacher Eligibility Test (in short
Page No.3/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
“TET”).
5.Admittedly these appellants did not have the qualification of TET
because TET itself has been introduced subsequently.
6.Though such a certificate verification has been made as stated supra
in May 2010, subsequently no appointment had been given to these appel-
lants as well as some other candidates on the ground that they did not pos-
sess the TET qualification.
7.Only at this juncture, they approached this Court by filing the re-
spective Writ Petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.25945 & 25855 of 2013, those two
Writ Petitions along with connected Writ Petitions were heard together by
the learned Judge, who passed the order on 30.09.2013, where the learned
Judge by taking note of the earlier orders passed by the Division Bench of
this Court in Review Application No.139 of 2012, dated 09.07.2013, was
pleased to dismiss all those Writ Petitions including these two Writ
Petitions. Aggrieved over the same, the present Writ Appeals have been
filed.
Page No.4/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
8.Heard Ms.C.Uma, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and
Mr.K.V.Sanjeev Kumar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for
the respondents.
9.As has been held by the learned Judge through the impugned or-
der, the issue has already been given a quietus. Mere certificate veri-
fication that has been taken place in the month of May 2010, i.e., prior to
NCTE notification dated 23.08.2010, ipso facto will not confer right on
those candidates, whose certificates have been verified.
10.Certificate verification is a routine and formal action, but inso-
far as the appointment is concerned, a Teacher must fulfil the quali-
fication including the TET. Admittedly since these appellants did not have
the qualification, they are not entitled to get the appointment and
therefore, the plea raised on behalf of the appellants before the Writ Court,
i.e., after the notification dated 23.08.2010 only such a qualification should
be insisted upon prior to which if any certificate verification is taken place
based on which appointment should be made is concerned, that grounds
Page No.5/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
raised by the petitioner side having been considered, was rejected by the
learned Judge, of course by following the earlier orders of the Division
Bench referred to above.
11.Since the issue has already been decided which has been fol-
lowed by the learned Judge in the order impugned, we do not find any
error in the said order passed by the learned Judge, consequently, these Writ
Appeals fail and they are dismissed. However there shall be no order as to
costs.
(R.S.K.,J.) (K.B., J.)
07.07.2023
Index: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
pbn
Page No.6/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
To
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep., by its Secretary to Govt.,
School Education Department,
Fort St., George, Chennai -9.
2.The Director of School Education,
College Road, Nungambakkam,
Chennai – 6.
3.The Director,
Teachers Recruitment Board,
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maligai,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 6.
Page No.7/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
R.SURESH KUMAR., J.
and
K.KUMARESH BABU.,J.
pbn
Writ Appeal Nos.220 & 221 of 2014
07.07.2023
Page No.8/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
