Writ Appeal dismissed following A.Firdose Begum. Underlying Writ Petition allowed, directing school education department to approve teacher appointment and release salary.
Writ Petition (MD).8066/2012 allowed; appellants bound to approve appointment of teacher and release salary with arrears within two months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.04.2017 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
W.A.(MD) No.1014 of 2014 and
M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2014
-vs-
Little Flower Middle School, represented by its Correspondent, Mrs.Rose Lawrence, Lourdu Nagar, Pudukkottai.
.. Respondent/Writ Petitioner
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order passed by this Court dated 23.08.2013 in W.P. (MD)NO.8066 of 2012.
Prayer in WP(MD). 8066/ 2012 :
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 of the 3rd respondent made in proceedings in O. Mu. No. 5755/A2/2011 dated 24.04.2012 and quash the same and consequently directing the 3rd respondent herein to approve the appointment of Mr. Vijayalakshmi as B.T. Science Teacher in the petitioner school from 17.09.2010 onwards with all other attendant benefits.
For Appellants : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Government Advocate
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Respondent : Mr.M.Muthugeethaiyan
2
J U D G M E N T
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
Heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the appellants and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent.
“2. It is submitted by the learned counsel on either side that the issue involved in the writ petition, in W.P.(MD) No.11957 of 2013, is squarely covered by the decision in A.Firdose Begum v. The Secretary to Government, School Education Department , in W.P.Nos.14072 of 2015 etc., batch, dated 22.09.2016. In the said decision, the Division Bench allowed the similar batch of writ petitions with a direction to the Government to release the salary of the Teachers / petitioners therein.
3. At this juncture, it would be beneficial to refer the operative portion of the said order, which reads as follows:
" 60. In the light of the above, we are of the view that the Government cannot insist upon the minority institution, both aided or unaided to abide by any Regulation framed under the provisions of the RTE Act. Therefore, we hold that G.O.Ms.No.181, School Education (C2) Department, dated 15.11.2011, issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu, is not applicable to the minority institutions. Similarly, G.O.Ms.No.76, dated 18.03.2015, issued by the Government of Puducherry, is also not applicable to the minority institutions.
61. Though the intention of the Government is that there should not be any discrimination among the Teachers working in non-minority Schools and minority Schools with respect to qualification and that there should be uniformity in the teaching imparted to the children, in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Pramati Educational & Cultural Trust, the Government cannot take shelter under the guise of discrimination to impose restrictions on minority institutions.
62.However, keeping in mind the larger interest in which the Government has issued the above G.Os., this Court feels that the minority institutions may also consider conducting a refresher course and also some interactive https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ sessions to all the Teachers during annual vacation, in order to ensure and improve the quality of Teachers.
3
63. In the result, the writ petitions are allowed and the writ appeals are dismissed with a direction to the Government to release the salary of the Teachers and also to pay the arrears of salary within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected M.Ps., are closed."
4. Since the issue involved in this matter is covered by the aforesaid decision in A.Firdose Begum (cited supra), we have called for the writ petition, in W.P.(MD) No.11957 of 2013, to be heard and disposed of along with this appeal and the same is also being disposed of accordingly.
3. In the light of the above discussions, the writ appeal in W.A.No.1014 of 2014 preferred by the Government is dismissed and following the decision in A.Firdose Begum (cited supra), the writ petition, in W.P.(MD) No.8066 of 2012 is allowed as prayed for. No Costs.Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
+1cc to Mr.D.Srinivasa Raghavan,Advocate,SR.52607
+1cc to M/S THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.NO. 52763
W.A.(MD) No.1014 of 2014 18.04.2017
SSL
kk/RSK/SAR4-08.05.2017-3P-3C
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the issue involved in the writ petition is squarely covered by the decision in A.Firdose Begum.
Whether the Government's regulations under the RTE Act are applicable to minority institutions.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
A.Firdose Begum v. The Secretary to Government, School Education DepartmentFollowed¶23
A.Firdose Begum v. The Secretary to Government, School Education Department, in W.P.Nos.14072 of 2015 etc., batch, dated 22.09.2016
Pramati Educational & Cultural TrustReferred¶26
Pramati Educational & Cultural Trust
Director of Elementary School Education, College Road, Chennai
Joint Director of Elementary School Education, College Road, Chennai
District Elementary Educational Officer, Pudukkottai
Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Pudukkottai
Little Flower Middle School
T.S. Sivagnanam
P. Velmurugan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
