postal receipt dated 04.09.2014, which show that the petitioners have exercised their options. The learned Counsel further contended that after exercising their options, as called for, to work in the schools run by the Kallar Reclamation Department as Secondary Grade Teachers, the petitioners were anxiously waiting for a suitable order for their placements. Whereas, in the meanwhile, the third respondent published the impugned selection list of candidates for the Directorate of Elementary Education, including the petitioners. But, with regard to the BC and MBC Welfare Department (Kallar Reclamation Schools), the selection list was not published. Therefore, the petitioners again went in person, to the third respondent and requested him to include their names in the selection list to the Kallar Reclamation Schools, for which, the petitioners were told that they have secured more marks and they have to be included only in the General Turn, which is completely incorrect. The reason is that the preferences of the candidates, who scored less marks in the TET Paper-I were accepted and were accommodated in the schools run by the Kallar Reclamation Department, but for securing more marks, the request of the petitioners to work in the Kallar Reclamation Schools shall not be deprived of. At this stage, the petitioners were informed to attend the counselling for the recruitment to the Directorate of Elementary Education and further informed that they could participate in the counselling for Kallar Reclamation Schools also, when the selection list was published. In view of the above instructions, the petitioners have also attended the counselling on 02.09.2014. However, the petitioners were not given the benefit of working in the Kallar Reclamation and therefore, they filed individual writ petitions, which are said to be pending. Therefore, a direction as prayed for shall be issued, he pleaded.
