Disposed

The Government of Tamilnadu v. v.Kamala Devi

Madras HC18 Apr 2016WA(MD)/619/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ appeal relying on a prior consent order. It directed the State to pay the petitioner's salary and refrain from taking removal steps pending the outcome of a related writ petition, without granting temporary approval for her appointment.

What did the court decide?

Directing the appellants to pay salary to First Respondent and refrain from taking any steps to remove her from service till the disposal of the underlying writ petition.

The Government of Tamilnadu Vs v.Kamala Devi — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 18.04.2016

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

¶7

W.A.(MD)No.619 of 2016

¶8

and

¶9

CMP(MD)No.4190 of 2016

¶10

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Additional Chief Secretary, Department of School Education,

¶11

Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶12

2.The Director of School Education,

¶13

DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

¶14

3.The District Elementary Educational Officer, O/o.District Elementary Educational Officer,

¶15

Tuticorin District.

¶16

4.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, O/o.Assistant Elementary Educational Officer,

¶17

Pudur, Tuticorin District.

.. Appellants

1.Ms.V.Kamala Devi

2.The Correspondent,

St. Antonys Primary School,

¶23

Vowalthothy Post,

¶24

Tuticorin District. .. Respondents

¶25

PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause XV of Letters of Patent, against the common order dated 28.01.2016 made in W.M.P.(MD) No.1548 of 2016 in W.P.(MD)No.1808 of 2016.

¶26

Prayer in WMP(MD). 1548/ 2016 :

¶27

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the afffidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to pay salary to the petitioner, by according temporary approval to her appointment as Secondary Grade Assistant in St. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Antonys Primary School, Vowalthothy post, Tuticorin district - 628 904, w.e.f. 16.12.2013, pending disposal of the above Writ

¶28

¶29

Petition.

¶30

Prayer in WP(MD). 1808/ 2016 :

¶31

Writ Petition is 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 G.O.Ms.No. 181, School Education (C2) Department, dated 15.11.2011, on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same in respect of the petitioner, directing the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner Ms.V.Kamala Devi, as Secondary Grade Assistant in St.Antonys Primary School, Vowalthothy post, Tuticorin district - 628 904.

¶32

For Appellants : Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan Special Government Pleader For R1 : Mr.Xavir Arul Raj

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

(Judgment of this Court was delivered by S.MANIKUMAR, J.)

¶35

In the present writ appeal, the challenge made is to the order passed by the writ Court, directing the appellants to grant temporary approval for appointment of the first respondent as Secondary Grade Teacher in the second respondent school and to pay salary to her from the date of her appointment, till the date of disposal of the writ petition.

¶36

2.Learned counsel appearing for the parties in the appeal, have consented that, they are agreeable that the order passed in W.A.(MD) No.220/2016 dated 05.02.2016, be passed in the present appeal also, details of which are given below. Thus, by consent, the present appeal is taken up and disposed of.

¶37

3.On an earlier occasion, a similar Writ Appeal (MD) No.220 of 2016, filed by the State, has been considered and disposed of on 05.02.2016 by a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, to which, one of us (SMKJ) is a party.

¶38

4.Mr.Xavir Arul Raj, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/petitioner has consented for a similar order to be passed.

¶39

5.In as much the above learned counsel for the first respondent/writ petitioner has consented for a similar order as made in W.A.(MD) No.220 of 2016, dated 05.02.2016, this Court deem it fit to extract the same and dispose of the Writ Appeal on the same lines:

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “4.In a similar writ appeal filed by the State in the Principal Bench, a Division Bench of this Court has passed the following order in W.A.No.1299 of 2015, dated

¶41

¶42

14.09.2015.

¶43

'4.Be that as it may, the issue as to whether the provisions of the Act, will be applicable to a minority institution, is pending consideration in Aswinithanappan Vs. Director of Education and another – (2014) 8 SCC 272.

¶44

5.In view of the above, without going into the merits of the case as to whether a teacher appointed in a minority school is required to have TET qualification, as the same is the subject matter of the Writ petition, we are of the considered view that interest justice would subserve, if the appointment of the first respondent is protected, without giving any direction to the State Government to grant temporary approval.

¶45

6.Mr.D.Krishnakumar, learned Special Government Pleader (Education) appearing for the appellants fairly submits that the first respondent shall not be terminated during the pendency of the said writ petition being W.P.No.14072 of 2015.

¶46

7.Accordingly, we direct that the first respondent shall be given her salary in the course of her employment and no steps to remove her from service shall be taken till the disposal of the writ petition. However, it is made clear that this order is subject to the final outcome of the pending writ petition. It is further made clear that the first respondent shall not claim any equity on account of this order, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, therein.

¶47

8.This intra-Court appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. ”

¶48

6.By consent, Writ Appeal is disposed of on the same lines as ordered in W.A.(MD) No.220 of 2016 dated 05.02.2016. Having consented, appellants are directed to comply with the orders. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

Assistant Registrar(AS)

¶51

/True Copy/

¶52

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶53

¶54

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1.The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶55

¶56

The Director of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

¶57

The District Elementary Educational Officer, O/o.District Elementary Educational Officer, Tuticorin District.

¶58

The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, O/o.Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Pudur, Tuticorin District.

¶59

+1cc to Mr.Fr.A.Xavier Arulraj, Advocate, Sr.No.21677

¶60

¶61

JM/JGB-DP/04.05.2016/4P-6C

¶62

W.A.(MD)No.619 of 2016 and CMP(MD)No.4190 of 2016 18.04.2016

¶63

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

The Government of Tamilnadu v. v.Kamala Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Government of Tamilnadu v. v.Kamala Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

L. Alagarsamy Vs the Revenue Divisional

Singamuthu, Vs the District Collector and

Marimuthu Vs the District Collector and the

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs M.Vinoth

The Director of School Vs S.Lalitha

The Stateof Tamilnadu Vs P.Rajendran Prasath