Allowed

S.S.Hassan Aboobacker, v. the Director of School

Madras HC18 Nov 2013WP(MD)/16905/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed by Rahmania Higher Secondary School, the Madurai Bench held that a minority school is not bound by a Government Order restricting post fills if the specific vacancy arose after that order was passed. The court directed the respondent authorities to retrospectively approve the appointment of a record clerk made in 2011.

What did the court decide?

Writ allowed; respondents directed to approve appointment of Mr. Abbas Ali as Record Clerk with effect from date of appointment within three months.

S.S.Hassan Aboobacker, Vs the Director of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 18.11.2013

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.16905 of 2013

¶7

S.S.Hassan Aboobacker, Manager and Correspondent, Rahmania Higher Secondary School, Melapalayam-627 005, Tirunelveli District. ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

¶10

2.The Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶11

3.The District Educational Officer, Tirunelveli. ... Respondents

¶12

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records connected with the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.1932/Aa2/2013 dated 19.08.2013 and quash the same and consequently directing the 3rd respondent to approve the appointment to Abbas Ali as record clerk from 03.01.2011 with all monetary and attendant benefits in Rahmania Higher Secondary School, Melapalayam, Tirunelveli District as per the representation of the petitioner dated 12.01.2011.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.K.K.Kannan

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.G.Muthukannan, Government Advocate

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The petitioner-School is a minority school. One Mr.Nagoor https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Meeran was working in the said school as Record Clerk. He retired on 31.12.2010. Thus a vacancy arose. The petitioner-Management

¶17

¶18

appointed one Mr.Abbas Ali as against the said vacancy on 03.01.2011 itself. Thereafter a proposal was submitted to the third respondent for approval of the said appointment and the same was in turn, forwarded to the Joint Director of School Education (Secondary), Chennai. The Joint Director, by his Proceedings in Na.Ka.No.30550/D2/E3/2011 dated 01.07.2011, informed the petitioner that his request for approval will be considered only after the Government sanctions the posts of non-teaching staff of aided schools. The petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.4454 of 2012 seeking a mandamus to the respondents to approve the appointment of Mr.Abbas Ali. That writ petition was disposed of by order dated 24.04.2012 with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner-School for approval of appointment of Mr.Abbas Ali as Record Clerk. Accordingly, the third respondent considered the claim of the petitioner and issued an order in Na.Ka.No.1932/Aa2/2013 dated 19.08.2013, thereby rejecting the same. Challenging the said order, the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition.

¶19

2.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents and also perused the records carefully.

¶20

3.In this writ petition, it is mainly contended that the petitioner, being a minority school, is not bound to obtain any prior permission from the Government for filling up the vacancy which had arisen in respect of the sanctioned post. It is further contended that G.O.Ms.No.203, School Education (D1) Department, dated 23.07.2010, upon which much reliance has been made by the respondents, has got no application to the facts of the case, because according to the petitioner, the vacancy arose only on 31.12.2010, whereas the Government Order pertains to the vacancies which had arisen before 23.07.2010.

¶21

4.In the counter filed by the respondents, it is stated that as per G.O.Ms.No.203, School Education (D1) Department, dated 23.07.2010, only 248 vacant posts of Record Clerks in Aided and Higher Secondary Schools were allowed to be filled up by the respective appointing authority, and that in the said G.O., the vacancy against which Mr.Abbas Ali had been appointed, had not been included. Therefore, according to the counter, further orders are awaited from the Government for filling up this vacancy also. It is also further stated in the counter that the petitioner is also bound by such direction of the Government.

¶22

5.In my considered opinion, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the vacancy arose on 31.12.2010 whereas G.O.Ms.No.203 is dated 23.07.2010. I am not https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ able to comprehend as to how one can expect the said G.O. to include the vacancy which came into being only on 31.12.2010. Therefore, citing the said G.O., the claim of the petitioner

¶23

¶24

cannot be rejected. Secondly, the petitioner is a minority school and the vacancy caused is in respect of a sanctioned post. Therefore, no further permission is required from the respondents to fill up the post. The post has been filled up strictly in accordance with the regulations. Therefore, the same has to be approved.

¶25

6.In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to approve the appointment of Mr.Abbas Ali as Record Clerk in the petitioner-School with effect from the date of appointment. The third respondent shall issue the consequential order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶26

7.However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar(RTI)

¶29

/True Copy/

¶30

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶31

¶32

1.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

¶33

2.The Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶34

3.The District Educational Officer, Tirunelveli.

¶35

+One cc to Mr.K.K.Kannan, Advocate, SR.No.56283

¶36

+One cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.N0.56428

¶37

¶38

RL/6 c- 26/11/2013

¶39

W.P.(MD)No.16905 of 2013

¶40

18.11.2013

¶41

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

S.S.Hassan Aboobacker, v. the Director of School

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.S.Hassan Aboobacker, v. the Director of School

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Pitchai, S/O Sappani Pillai Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

V.Subramanian, Vs the Superintending Engineer

R.J.a.Raveendran, Vs the Commissioner

J.Vellathurai, Vs the Joint Director of School-

T.Valli, Vs the Agriculture College and

G.Manoharan Vs the State