Allowed

Mrs.R. Kavitha v. the Director of Elementary

Madras HC21 Sept 2011WP(MD)/10720/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

TheMadras High Court directed the Director of Elementary Education to issue appropriate clarification to the District Elementary Educational Officer regarding the petitioner's seniority position, based on recruitment board orders and RTI information, within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent to issue clarification to the District Elementary Educational Officer to pass an order on the petitioner's representation within eight weeks.

Mrs.R. Kavitha Vs the Director of Elementary — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 21/09/2011

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR

¶6

Writ Petition (MD)No.10720 of 2011

¶7

R.Kavitha ... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

1.The Director of Elementary Education Chennai.

¶10

2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District,

¶11

Virudhunagar.

¶12

3.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Narikudi Union, Virudhunagar District. ...

¶13

Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent No.1 to pass orders regarding the service and monetary benefits in pursuance to the clarification seeking communication in Na.Ka.No.3884/Aa4/2011 dated 19.07.2010 by the respondent No.2 addressed to the respondent No.1 within the time stipulated by this Court

¶15

For petitioner ...Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy

¶16

For respondents ...Mr.S.Chandrasekar Government Advocate

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Material on record, shows that the writ petitioner, was one among the candidates, who had applied for the post of Graduate Assistants for the academic year 2004-05. The Teachers Recruitment Board conducted a written competitive examination for the recruitment of Junior Graduate Assistants for the academic year 2004-05. The candidates were shortlisted for certificate verification based on the written examination marks on merit and communal reservation. After verification of all certificates, shortlisted candidates were awarded weightage marks for

¶19

(a) period of wait after employment exchange registration https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (maximum 4 marks) and

¶20

(b) in the experience in the relevant subject / in the relevant classes (maximum 3 marks).

¶21

¶22

A maximum of 7 marks can be awarded as weightage. Thereafter, based on the total marks (written) examination marks and weightage marks, the final merit cum communal roster of provisionally selected candidates has been prepared and published by the Board.

¶23

The petitioner has secured 39 marks in the competitive examination. Based on the marks and merit cum communal reservation, she was called for certificate verification on 15.03.2002 in the category of Backward Class Women. She has attended the certificate verification on 15.03.2005 and also produced the employment registration card, wherein the date of registration was mentioned as 17.02.2003. Accordingly, one mark was given as weightage mark in the certificate verification. Her total marks become 90 and she was also provisionally selected by the Board as Junior Graduate Assistant in the supplementary list released for the Adi-Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department in the same year.

¶24

Alleging that she has not been awarded marks properly, the petitioner has approached this Court in W.P.No.8991 of 2009 and pursuant to the directions of this Court made in the above writ petition and the letter of the District Employment office, Tirunelveli, letter No.A1/199695/2005 dated 14.02.2007, the Teachers Recruitment Board decided to award 3 marks for the period of wait in the employment exchange for 7 years and 5 months (from 24.04.1997 to 01.10.2004). Accordingly, the Board has awarded 2 marks as weightage marks and found that the petitioner was eligible to be selected in the Backward Class Women Category for the Department of Directorate of Elementary Education in the position below the turn BW-64 and above the turn BW-65 in Junior Grade Assistant provisional selection list, dated 31.03.2003 at page number 19. Orders have also been issued by the Chairman of the Teachers Recruitment Board, Chennai, in Rc.No.4424/B2/09 dated 23.04.2010, to that effect and that the petitioner has been assigned communal roster as BW-64A in the above selection list. Consequently, the petitioner has been re-allotted to the Director of Elementary Education Department and that the said authority has been requested to admit her in the department of Elementary Education, as Graduate Teacher (Mathematics), if the petitioner had already been relieved of from the Adi-Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department based on the letter issued by the Board. Pursuant to the orders of Teachers Recruitment Board, dated 23.04.2010, the Commissioner O1/11603/2010 dated 12.05.2010 has requested the District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer, Tirunelveli District, to relieve the petitioner and submit a report to the Directorate of Elementary Education, Chennai, and to the Commissioner, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Chennai. Consequently, in Rc.No.A3/31952/ 2010, dated 21.05.2010, the District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Tirunelveli, has also relieved the petitioner, as she has been re-allotted to the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Directorate of Elementary Education, Chennai, on the basis of the marks and communal rotation.

¶25

¶26

Material on record further discloses that in Rc.No.137307/D1/2010, dated 01.06.2010, the Director of Elementary Education, Chennai, has directed the District Elementary Educational Officer, Virudhunagar, to issue necessary appointment orders, appointing the petitioner as a Graduate Teacher (Mathematics). Accordingly, the abovesaid authority has also issued orders in Rc.No.2035/A4/2010, dated Nil of June 2010, appointing the petitioner as a Graduate Teacher (Mathematics) in the Panchayat Union Middle School, P.Vaigaikulam, Narikudi Panchayat, Virudhunagar District. Though, the petitioner has been re-allotted by the Teachers Recruitment Board, the Directorate of Elementary Education, Chennai, had assigned seniority No.BW-64A in the selection list and drawn for Graduate Assistants for the academic year 2004-05. Contending inter-alia that her seniority position, has not been maintained properly, the petitioner has made a representation to the District Elementary Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District. In response to the same, the said authority in his proceedings Rc.No.3884/B4/2010, dated 19.07.2010, from the Director of Elementary Education, Chennai, has sought for the following clarification:

¶27

“1.khWjiy tpUg;g khWjyhf vLj;Jf ; bfhs;shky; bjhpt [g ; gl;oaypd; juthpirg;go tHA;fg ;gl ;l eph;thf khWjyhfBt Vw;f Btz ;Lk ;.

¶28

2.myF tpl;L myF khWjyhf; bfhs;shky ; ju thpirapy; B.W.64 kw;Wk ; B.W.65 MfpBahh;fSf;F nj;Jiw jhaf Jiwahf jpfH;tJ Bghy B.W.64 Sf;Fhpa jd;Fk ; bjhlf;f fy;tpj; Jiwia jhafj; Jiwahf Vw;Wf ; bfhz;L Mjpjpuhtpl eyj;Jiwapy; gzpahw;wpa KGf; fhyj;ija[k ; nj;Jiwapy; nizj;J mjd; mog;gilapy; nj;Jiwapy; vdf;F Kd;Dhpikia eph;zapf;f Btz ;Lk ;. ne;j Kd;Dhpikf;Fhpa gyd;fSk ; rYiffSk; ghJfhf;fg ;gl Btz;Lk ;.

¶29

3.gzp tpLtpg;g [f ;Fk ; gzpBaw;gpf;Fk ; nilg;gl ;l fhyj;ij gzpf;fhykhff; bfhz;L Cjpak; tHA;fg ;gl Btz;Lk ;.

¶30

4.vdBt Bkw;fhZk ; Mrphpiaapd; Bfhhpf;iffs; rhh;ghf jA;fsJ Bkyhd Mizapid gzpe;J Btz;LfpBwd;.”

¶31

When the abovesaid clarification was pending with the Directorate, the petitioner, seemed to have made a representation under the Right to Information Act 2005 to the Public Information Officer. Public Information Officer and Additional Member of Teachers Recruitment Board, in his proceeding in O.Mu.970/B2/2010, dated 17.03.2011, has sent a reply to the effect that inasmuch as the petitioner has been assigned seniority No.BW-64A in the selection list drawn by the Teachers Recruitment Board itself, the said position would make applicable for the purpose of “service seniority and promotion to the petitioner to higher post”. The Public Information Officer and Additional Member of Teachers Recruitment Board has also made it clear that the abovesaid No.BW64A has not been issued, treating the appointment in the Directorate of Elementary Educational, as transferred from the Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department.

¶32

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶33

In the light of what is stated above, this Court is of the view that there cannot be any impediment in assigning

¶34

¶35

appropriate clarifications by the Directorate of Elementary Education, Chennai, the first respondent herein. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to consider the proceeding of the Chairman of the Teachers Recruitment Board, Chennai in Rc.No.4424/B2/09, dated 23.04.2010, the information furnished to the petitioner in O.Mu.970/B2/2010, dated 17.03.2011, by the Public Information Officer, Chennai, and issue appropriate clarifications to the District Elementary Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar to pass an order on the representation of the writ petitioner dated 07.07.2010. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶36

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

Deputy Registrar(Accts.)

/True Copy/

Assistant Registrar

1.The Director of Elementary Education, Chennai.

¶43

2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶44

3.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Narikudi Union, Virudhunagar District.

¶45

+1cc to Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, Advocate Sr.No.32612

¶46

+1cc to the Special Govt.Pleader, Sr.No.32590

¶47

¶48

ssk/14.10.2011 /6c-4p/-

¶49

Writ Petition No.10720 of 2011

¶50

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Mrs.R. Kavitha v. the Director of Elementary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs.R. Kavitha v. the Director of Elementary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. M. Josphin Iruthaya Rani, Vs the Member Secretary

S.Sajikumar Vs the District Collector

I.Raju Vs the State of Tamilnadu

V. Ramaraj, S/O.Vellaiyan, Vs the General Manager

C. Shobana, Vs the Director

S. Kumaresan, Vs the District Collector