The Court dismissed the intra-court appeal against the order setting aside an appointment made on seniority without considering inter se merit, holding such a selection violated mandatory provisions of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 1974.
The appeal was dismissed with no costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
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: 08.11.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU W.A.[MD]No.1299 of 2018 and
C.M.P.[MD]Nos.9240 and 10555 of 2018
M.Srikanth ... Appellant/4th Respondent
Vs.
...2nd to 4th Respondents/ 2nd to 3rd Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order of Writ Court dated 23.03.2018, made in W.P.(MD) No.4709 of 2014.
Prayer in WP(MD).No. 4709/ 2014 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.41D/2013 dated 6.11.2013 on the file of the 3rd respondent and consequential order in Mu.Mu.88391/W5/E2/2013 dated 27.2.2014 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal consequently direct the respondent no.1 to 3 to promote the petitioner as PG Assitant (English) in the 3rd responent school from date of vacancy with all consequential benefits within a time stipulated by this Honble Court.
For Appellant : Mr.V.Panneer Selvam
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Respondent No.1 : Mr.M.Ajmalkhan, Senior Counsel, For Mr.J.Lawrance
2
[
For Respondents 2&3 : Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian, Special Government Pleader For Respondent No.4 : Mr.D.Venkatesh
J U D G M E N T
[ Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.K.SASIDHARAN, J.]
Challenge in this intra-Court Appeal is to the order dated 23 March, 2018, in W.P.(MD)No.4709 of 2014, setting aside the appointment of the appellant in the post of P.G. Assistant in English.
THE BACKGROUND :
RIVAL SUBMISSIONS :
3
Judge, contended that there was no consideration of the inter se merits and the appellant was appointed only on the basis of his seniority. According to the learned Senior Counsel, there was total non-compliance of the statutory provisions and as such, the learned Single Judge was justified in setting aside the selection.
ANALYSIS:
Sd/-
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ /True Copy/
Assistant Registrar(CO)
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-I)
4
To
SML
KM/PM/SAR1/07.12.2018/4P/7C
Judgment made in W.A.[MD]No.1299 of 2018 Dated: 08.11.2018
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the appointment of an appellant as P.G. Assistant was valid when inter se merit was not considered initially and seniority was the sole criterion.
Whether the Management's failure to consider relative merit and ability at the time of initial appointment violates mandatory provisions of the Regulation Rules.
Whether the learned Single Judge was correct in quashing the selection for non-compliance with Rule 15(4)(i).
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Srikanth
V.Rajesh Kanna
Joint Director of School Education
District Educational Officer, Dindigul
Secretary, N.S.V.V.Boys Higher Secondary School
K.K.SASIDHARAN
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
