Madras High Court
G.Prasanth B.A. (Sanskrit) vs The Director Of School Education on 9 October, 2025
Author: M.S.Ramesh
Bench: M.S. Ramesh
W.A.No.1241 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.10.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
W.A.No.1241 of 2022
and C.M.P.Nos.7102 and 7105 of 2025
and C.M.P.Nos.7845, 7849 and 7852 of 2022
G.Prasanth B.A. (Sanskrit), B.Ed.
Sanskrit Pandit
Sri Dhandapani Oriental Higher Secondary School
Kanchipuram 631 502 ... Appellant
Vs.
1. The Director of School Education
College Road
Chennai-6
2. The Chief Educational Officer
Kanchipuram
Kanchipuram District
3. The District Educational Officer
Kanchipuram
Kanchipuram District
4. The Correspondent
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:03:00 pm )
W.A.No.1241 of 2022
Sri Dhandapani Oriental Higher Secondary School
Kanchipuram -631 502
5.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Secretary to Government
Education Department
Secretariat
Chennai -9
6. The Chairman
Teacher's Recruitment Board
D.P.I. Compound,
Chennai - 6
(Respondents 5 and 6 are impleaded
vide order dated 27.11.2023 made in
CMP. No.26863/2023 by RMDJ & MSQJ ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patents, praying to set
aside the order passed in W.P.No.26172 of 2021 dated 19.04.2022 and
thereby allow the Writ Petition as prayed for.
For Appellant : Mr.S.N.Ravichandran
For Respondents : Mr.R.Neethi Perumal
Government Advocate - R1 to R4
Mr.R.Neelakandan
Additional Advocate General
Assisted by Mr.C.Kathiravan
Standing Counsel - R6
JUDGMENT
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:03:00 pm )
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
When the sanctioned post of Sanskrit Pandit in the 4th respondent
school fell vacant, the school had obtained the necessary permission from
theSchool Educational Authorities for filling up the said post. The
petitioner herein was accordingly appointed as a Sanskrit Pandit therein.
The petitioner claims to have joined on 03.06.2019 in the forenoon.
Simaltaneously, the school had sought for approval of his appointment
before the authorities through their proposal dated 26.06.2019. However,
the said proposal was rejected by the 2nd respondent herein on
30.12.2020, predominantly on two grounds. Firstly, that the petitioner
should produce particulars with regard to his qualification in Tamil Nadu
Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) and secondly, as to whether the Siksha
Sastri (B.Ed) obtained from Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha was
equivalent to the B.T. degree of the University of Madras, Chennai.
2.Insofar as the second query raised by the department is
concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner had produced a copy of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:03:00 pm )
the equivalence certificate issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu,
Education Department dated 02.01.1973, which evidences that the degree
of Siksha Sastri (B.Ed.) obtained by the petitioner from Rashtriya
Sanskrit Vidyapeetha is equivalent to the B.T. degree of the University of
Madras, Chennai. Thus, the second query of the department stands
answered accordingly.
3.Insofar as the first query is concerned, under the provisions of the
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the
teachers in a private school are mandatorily required to qualify in TET
within a period of five (5) years from the date of commencement of the
Act. However, in the instant case, the Educational Department of the
Government of Tamil Nadu has not conducted the TET in Sanskrit
language from the date of commencement of the Act till date. The
learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the Department has
already taken steps to obtain the syllabus from the NCERT, for the
purpose of conducting TET in Sanskrit and the same is under
consideration. According to him, the TET will be conducted by them as
soon as the necessary syllabus is obtained by them from NCERT.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:03:00 pm )
4.When admittedly, the department itself has not conducted TET
for Sanskrit language all these years, requiring the petitioner to produce
qualification of having passed in TET is a futile requirement to be met.
At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
as and when the TET is conducted, he is willing to participate in the same
and qualify himself therein.
5.Thus, the only ground on which the proposal seeking for
approval of the appointment of the petitioner is pending before the
Educational Authorities is for want of a TET qualification. Since, the
TET has not been conducted for the past 15 years, and the petitioner was
appointed wayback on 03.06.2019, we are of the view, that he cannot be
kept to wait indefinitely for approval of his appointment. Not to mention
that serious prejudice would be caused to the teacher for want of salaries.
In our view, if the department is directed to grant in principle approval
and disburse the necessary grant to the concerned school, with a rider to
the teacher to qualify in the TET, as and when the same is conduced by
the department, the ends of justice could be secured.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:03:00 pm )
6.The learned Single Judge, before whom the rejection order dated
30.12.2020 was challenged in W.P.No.26172 of 2021, had placed reliance
on a decision of this Court, wherein, the qualification in TET has been
held to be mandatory, and therefore, had rejected the Writ Petition.
However, the fact that TET in Sanskrit has not been conducted at all by
the department, was not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge.
In the light of our aforesaid observations, we deem it appropriate to
interfere with the order passed in the Writ Petition also.
7.Accordingly, the order passed by the Chief Educational Officer,
Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District, in x/K/vz;/8073-M5-2019 dated
30.12.2020, as well as the order passed in W.P.No.26172 of 2021 dated
19.04.2022 are quashed. Consequently, there shall be a direction to the
respondents 1 to 3 herein to forthwith pass orders of approval of the 4th
respondent school of the appointment of the petitioner herein, within a
period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
While passing such orders of approval, the respondents 1 to 3 are at
liberty to impose the condition to the petitioner to qualify himself in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:03:00 pm )
ensuing TET within a period of five (5) years from the date on which the
first TET in Sanskrit is conducted. However, such time limit of five (5)
years shall be subject to the further condition that TET in Sanskrit is
conducted every year during the course of the five years period.
8.The Writ Appeal stands allowed accordingly. No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[M.S.R, J.] [R.S.V, J.]
09.10.2025
kas
Index: Yes / No
Neutral Citation
Speaking / Non Speaking
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
kas
To.
1. The Director of School Education
College Road
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:03:00 pm )
Chennai-6
2. The Chief Educational Officer
Kanchipuram
Kanchipuram District
3. The District Educational Officer
Kanchipuram
Kanchipuram District
4. The Correspondent
Sri Dhandapani Oriental Higher Secondary School
Kanchipuram -631 502
5.The Secretary to Government
Education Department
Secretariat, Chennai -9
6. The Chairman
Teacher's Recruitment Board
D.P.I. Compound, Chennai - 6
and C.M.P.Nos.7102 and 7105 of 2025
and C.M.P.Nos.7845, 7849 and 7852 of 2022
09.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:03:00 pm )
