Madras High Court

A.Ganesan vs The Government Oftamil Nadu on 29 August, 2025

W.P.(MD) No.20730 of 2017

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved On : 31.07.2025

Pronounced On : 29.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.D. MARIA CLETE

W.P. (MD) No.20730 of 2017

A.Ganesan,
S/o. Arumuga Nadar,
New No.10/14 (Old No.10/30),
Singarathoppu Street,
Kudankulam - 627 106,
Tirunelveli District. ... Petitioner
Vs.

1. The Government ofTamil Nadu
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Teachers Recruitment Board,
Rep. by its Member - Secretary,
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maaligai,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.

3. The Director of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.

4. The District Educational Officer,
Tirunelveli District,
Tirunelveli- 627 002. ... Respondents

1/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 04:31:51 pm )
W.P.(MD) No.20730 of 2017

PRAYER:
To issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus and call for the records
relating to the order Na.Ka.No.2897/Aa.2/2015 dated 30.04.2015 passed by
the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently, to direct the
Teacher (Chemistry) respondents to appoint the petitioner as Graduate in a
Government School under the control of the 3rd and 4th respondents and grant
all the service, monetary and other attended benefits to the petitioner with
effect from July 2010 i.e. on par with the Graduate Teachers appointed based
on the Certificate Verification held on 13.05.2010 within a time limit to be
fixed by this Hon’ble Court and pass such further or other orders as this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and
thus render justice.

APPEARANCE OF PARTIES:
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Vignesh, Advocate
for Mr.A.Thirumurthy, Advocate

For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjad Khan,
Government Advocate

JUDGMENT

Heard.

2. The Petitioner, an aspirant for the post of Graduate Teacher, seeks to

challenge the order of the 2nd Respondent, the Teachers Recruitment Board

(TRB), communicated through its letter dated 30.04.2015, wherein he was

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 04:31:51 pm )

informed as follows:–

“2009-2010 Mk; Mz;by; Ntiytha;g;G gjpT %g;G mbg;gilapy; mwptpay; (Ntjpapay;) Mrphpah; gzpaplj;jpw;F miof;fg;gl;l jpU.m.fNzrd; gpw;gLj;jg;gl;l tFg;igr; rhh;e;jth;. kDjhuh; rhd;wpjo;

                                  rhpghh;gG
                                          ; f;F    13.05.2010     md;W     miof;fg;gl;lhh;.

rhd;wpjo; rhpghh;g;gpd; NghJ kDjhuh; gp.v];.rp.gp.vl;.

Kbj;J 21.07.1997 Mk; Mz;L Ntiy tha;gG ;

mYtyfj;jpy; gjpT nra;Js;shh;. (Land Acquisition) vd;w Kd;Dhpikapy; mwptpay; (Ntjpapay;) ghlj;jpw;F gpw;gLj;jg;gl;Nlhh; gphptpy; jq;fsJ gjpT ehs; vl;lg;gltpy;iy. NkYk; gpw;gLj;jg;gl;Nlhh; (nghJ) gphptpy; ,Wjp njhpTf;fhd tiuaWf;fg;gl;l ehs; 17.09.1991. tiuaWf;fg;gl;l ehspy; gjpT %g;gpy; kDjhuh; gjptpy; ,isath; vd;gjhy; kDjhuh; gl;ljhhp Mrphpah; mwptpay; (Ntjpapay;) ghlj;jpw;F Njh;T nra;ag;gltpy;iy vd;w tptuj;ij kDjhuUf;F njhptpf;fyhfpwJ.

,e;epiyapy; 23.08.2010 Mk; Mz;bw;F gpwF njhpT nra;ag;gLk; Mrphpah;fs; jFjpj;Njh;T vOjp Njh;r;rp ngWtJ fl;lhakhf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ vd;w tptuKk; kDjhuUf;F njhptpf;fg;gLfpwJ.”

3. The Petitioner had earlier filed W.P. No. 26379 of 2015 before the

Principal Bench, seeking a direction to consider his representation dated

14.02.2015, followed by a reminder dated 21.04.2015, for his selection and

for issuance of an appointment and posting order. The said writ petition was

disposed of by order dated 25.08.2015, directing the Respondents to consider

his representation on merits and in accordance with law. However, even prior

to such disposal, the TRB had already passed the impugned order dated

30.04.2015.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 04:31:51 pm )

4. The Petitioner has once again approached this Court by filing the

present writ petition before the Madurai Bench. When the matter was taken

up on 13.11.2017, notice was accepted by the Respondents. On the same day,

the learned counsel for the Petitioner made an endorsement withdrawing the

two W.M.Ps. [W.M.P. (MD) Nos. 17001 of 2017 and 17002 of 2017], which

had been filed seeking interim direction and stay.

5. The 2nd Respondent–Teachers Recruitment Board (TRB) filed a

counter affidavit dated “Nil, December 2024.” In paragraphs 5 to 9 of the

said affidavit, the following averments were made:–

“5.It is submitted that as per the direction passed by the Hon’ble court the Board considered the representations of the petitioner and passed a rejection order on the representation of the petitioner dated 21.04.2015 vide Na.Ka.No.2897/Aa.2/2015 dated 30.04.2015 and Na.Ka.No. 4914/LC/L3/2015 dated 04.11.2015 stating that his employment seniority date 21.07.1997 did not reach the cut- off date for selection under BC (Land Acquisition priority) quota and also did not reach under B.C(General), since the cut-off date for B.C.(General) candidates was 17.09.1991 and further it is stated that the recruitment for the Graduate Teacher year 2010-2011 has attained finality and for the year 2011-2012 the vacancies for the post of BT assistants are filled only through the eligible candidates who passed Teachers Eligibility Test.

6.It is submitted that Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) was made mandatory qualification for appointment of teachers as per NCTE by their notification issued on 28.08.2010; following the same the State Government issued

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 04:31:51 pm )

G.O.Ms.No.181 School Education (C2) Department, dated 15.11.2011 prescribing TET as mandatory qualification. Based on the aforementioned Government Order the Board herein had conducted Teachers Eligibility Test in the subsequent yeas (2012, 2013, 2014, 2017, 2019 and 2022)

7. It is submitted that further the Government of Tamil Nadu issued a Government Order in G.O(Ms). No. 149 School Education (TRB) dated 20.07.2018 wherein a competitive examination is introduced for selection for the post of BT Assistants for TET passed candidates.

8. It is stated that accordingly the Board published the Notification in Notification Advertisement No.03/2023 dated 25.10.2023 for the direct recruitment for the post of BT Assistants and BRTE based on the GO (Ms.) No. 149 School Education (TRB) dated 20.07.2018 and the vacancy details furnished by the User Department and following that, the Written Examination was held on 04.02.2024. Further, the whole recruitment for BT Assistant 2023-2024 has attained finality by way of releasing provisional selection list for all subjects at various dates.

9. It is stated that further it is the decision of the Government to fill up the Graduate Teacher vacancies by conducting competitive examination and the Board being the Recruiting Agency cannot relax the same and therefore petitioner candidature cannot be considered by the Board and claims for the post of BT Assistant without challenging the aforementioned Government Orders is untenable.”

6. The learned Government Advocate further placed reliance on the

judgment of the Division Bench in X. Arockiamary v. The Secretary to

Government and Others, W.A. (MD) No. 1310 of 2025, dated 02.06.2025. In

the said case, the Division Bench dismissed a petition filed by another

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 04:31:51 pm )

teacher seeking similar relief. Paragraph 4 of the said order is extracted

below:–

“4.We are not swayed by the said submissions. Even though the learned Single Judge had rested his order on the strength of the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench referred above, we would add one more reason. Admittedly, the cause of action for the writ petitioner dates back to the year 2013 – 2014. But the writ petition was filed in the year 2025. Thus, there has been a delay of eleven years. During the intervening period, several developments had taken place. The Government had issued G.O.(Ms)No.149, School Education Department, dated 20.07.2018. The writ petitioner had not challenged the subsequent government orders. Thus, the appellant deserves to be non-suited even on the ground of laches. The writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.”

7. In view of the stand taken by the Respondents and the judgment

relied upon by them, it is evident that no case has been made out warranting

interference with the impugned order. Accordingly, W.P. (MD) No. 20730 of

2017 stands dismissed. No costs.

29.08.2025

Index: Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-speaking Order Neutral Citation : Yes / No LS

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 04:31:51 pm )

1. The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Teachers Recruitment Board, Rep. by its Member - Secretary, 4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maaligai, DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.

3. The Director of School Education, DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.

4. The District Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli- 627 002.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 04:31:51 pm )