Madras High Court
Josephine Shanthy vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 23 January, 2025
Author: R.Vijayakumar
Bench: R.Vijayakumar
W.P.(MD).No.25996 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 23.01.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.P(MD)No.25996 of 2024
and
W.M.P(MD) No.22047 of 2024
Josephine Shanthy,
St.Joseph Girls Higher Secondary School,
Sathankulam,
Thoothukudi District. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Additional Chief Secretary,
Department of School Education,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 9.
2. The Director of School Education,
DPI Campus,
College Road, Chennai – 6.
3. The Chief Educational Officer,
The Office of the Chief Educational Officer,
Thoothukudi District.
4. The District Educational Officer (Secondary)
The Office of the District Educational Officer,
Thiruchandur,
Tuticorin District.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.25996 of 2024
5. The Correspondent,
St.Joseph Girls Higher Secondary School,
Sathankulam,
Thoothukudi 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 pertaining to the impugned proceedings dated 13.09.2024, in
O.Mu.No.2743/AA1/2024, on the file of the fourth respondent and quash the
same in respect of the petitioner, directing the respondents to approve the
appointment of the petitioner Mrs.P.Josephine Shanthy, working as
B.T.Assistant (History), in St.Joseph Girls Higher Secondary School
Sattankulam, Thoothukudi District, w.e.f 04.06.2018, with all service
benefits.
For Petitioner : Fr.S.Savarimuthu
For M/s.Father Xavier Associates
For R1 to R4 : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The instant Writ Petition has been filed by a B.T.Assistant appointed in
the fifth respondent School, challenging the order passed by the fourth
respondent on 13.09.2024, wherein, the proposal forwarded by the
Management for approving her appointment has been rejected.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the proposal forwarded
by the Management seeking approval of the appointment of the writ petitioner
as B.T.Assistant (History) w.e.f. 04.06.2018 has been rejected citing the
following reasons:
a. The Management has not enclosed no surplus
Certificate;
b. The Management has not stated whether Rule
15 (4) of the Tamil Nadu Recognized Private School
Regulation Rules 1974 has been followed or not; and
c. The petitioner has not passed TET examination.
Challenging the above said impugned order, the present writ petition
has been filed.
3. According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner,
the fifth respondent institution being a minority institution, the question of
following Rule 15(4) of the above said Rules or pass in TET examination is
not mandatory. As far as the surplus teachers are concerned, the certificate has
already been enclosed along with the proposals by the Management. In such
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
circumstances, he prays for quashing the impugned order and to approve her
appointment as B.T.Assistant.
4. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for
the respondents 1 to 4 herein had contended that the fifth respondent
Institution is under corporate management. It is for them to establish that
there are no surplus teachers within the Corporate Management in the
academic year, in which the petitioner was appointed. He further contended
that the petitioner having not pass in TET examination would not be entitled
to any approval from the authorities.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned
counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. As far as the plea of following Rule 15 (4) of Tamil Nadu
Recognized Private School Regulation Rules, 1974, is concerned, the Hon'ble
Division Bench of our High Court in judgement reported in 2007 (4) L.W.
617 (Eka Ratchagar Sabai Higher Secondary School, represented by its
Correspondent and another Vs. K.Sumathi and another) has held that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
said Rule is not applicable to a minority institutions.
7. As far as the plea relating to passing of TET examination is
concerned, the Hon'ble Division Bench of our High Court in paragraph No.
74(c) of the judgment reported in 2023 (3) LW 112 (The Director of School
Education, D.P.I. Campus, College Road, Chennai -06 and two others Vs.
Velayutham and another) has categorically held that pass in TET
examination is not mandatory for being appointed as a teacher in a Minority
Institution.
8. As far as the plea relating to surplus teachers in the Corporate
Management is concerned, it is for the Management to establish before the
concerned authorities that there are no surplus teachers within the Corporate
Management in the academic year by furnishing the relevant records.
9. In view of the above said deliberations, this Court is inclined to pass
the following orders:
a. The order impugned in the writ petition is
set aside and the matter is remitted back to the fie of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the fourth respondent;
b. The fourth respondent is directed to
consider the proposal submitted by the Management
without insisting upon following Rule 15(4) of
Tamil Nadu Recognized Private School Regulation
Rules, 1974, or passing of TET examination;
c. The Management is directed to furnish all
the records relating to the fact that there are no
surplus teachers in the Corporate Management in
concerned academic year in the concerned subject;
and
d. In case, if the fourth respondent finds that
there are no surplus teachers, he shall proceed to
forward the files to the third respondent within a
period of eight weeks from the date of submission
of the records from the School Management.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10. With the above said observations, this Writ Petition stands disposed
of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently connected
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
23.01.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
ebsi
To
1. The Additional Chief Secretary,
Department of School Education,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 9.
2. The Director of School Education,
DPI Campus,
College Road, Chennai – 6.
3. The Chief Educational Officer,
The Office of the Chief Educational Officer,
Thoothukudi District.
4. The District Educational Officer (Secondary)
The Office of the District Educational Officer,
Thiruchandur,
Tuticorin District.
5. The Correspondent,
St.Joseph Girls Higher Secondary School,
Sathankulam,
Thoothukudi District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.
ebsi
23.01.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
