Allowed

Mrs.S.Sivasakthi, v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC27 Mar 2018WP/7101/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Five petitions filed seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the State of Tamil Nadu government departments to consider representations by petitioners regarding recommendations for their inclusion in a special examination for appointment as Graduate Teachers in government schools. The court directed the relevant government department to consider the recommendation and pass appropriate orders to facil

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Secretary of the School Education Department to consider the recommendation and pass appropriate orders to enable the petitioners to participate in the special examination within four

Mrs.S.Sivasakthi, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 27.03.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA

¶5

W.P.Nos.7101 to 7105 of 2018

¶6

Mrs.M.Sivasakthi .. Petitioner in W.P.No.7101/18 Mrs.M.Mangaiyarkarasi .. Petitioner in W.P.No.7102/18 Mrs.C.Gandhimathi .. Petitioner in W.P.No.7103/18 Mrs.M.Vijayalakshmi .. Petitioner in W.P.No.7104/18 Mrs.S.Sathiya .. Petitioner in W.P.No.7105/18

¶7

-vs1. The State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary School Education Department Fort St.George Chennai 600 009 2. The State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary Social Welfare & Nutritious Meal Programme Department Fort St.George Chennai 600 009 3. The Director of School Education College Road, Nungambakkam Chennai 600 006

¶8

The Director of Social Welfare Sidco Old Building, Guindy Chennai 600 032. ... Respondents in all the W.Ps

¶9

Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioners' representations dated 15.02.2018 after taking into account of the recommendations of the third respondent dated 10.11.2017 and issue suitable orders to the Chairman, Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board to conduct the Special Examination for the appointment of Graduate Teachers in Government Schools and other

¶10

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

¶11

Schools etc., in the State of Tamil Nadu.

¶12

For Petitioners :: Mr.P.Chandrasekaran

¶13

For Respondents :: Mr.V.Kadhirvelu Special Government Pleader

¶14

ORDER

¶15

These five writ petitions have been filed seeking a common relief of a mandamus directing the Secretary to Government, School Education Department and the Secretary to Government, Social Welfare & Nutritious Meal Programme Department, the respondents 1 & 2 herein to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 15.2.2018 after taking into account the recommendations made by the Director of School Education, Chennai, the third respondent herein dated 10.11.2017 and then to issue suitable orders to the Chairman, Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board to conduct the Special Examination for the appointment of Graduate Teachers in the Government and other Schools etc., in the State of Tamil Nadu.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Mrs.M.Sivasakthi, the petitioner in W.P.No.7101 of 2018 had completed the B.Litt in the year 2014, T.P.T.course in the year 2015 as well as M.A. in the year 2017. With these qualifications, she was appointed as Noon Meal Organizer on 14.8.2012 at the Panchayat Union Primary School, Orivayal, Ramnad District and since then she has been working without any promotion with the salary of Rs.10,140/-. The petitioner in W.P.No.7102 of 2018 Mrs.M.Mangaiyarkarasi completed B.Litt in the year 2014 as well as T.P.T.course in the year 2016 and now working as Noon Meal Organizer at Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Muthupattinam, Karaikudi with the salary of Rs.12,925/-. The petitioner in W.P.No.7103 of 2018 Mrs.C.Gandhimathi completed B.Litt in the year 2004, M.A. in the year 2011 as well as B.Ed., in the year 2009 and now working as Noon Meal Organizer at the Panchayat Union Primary School, Varadhappanur with the salary of Rs.8,963/-. The petitioner in W.P.No.7104 of 2018 Mrs.M.Vijayalakshmi completed B.Litt in the year 2008, M.A., in the year 2015 as well as T.P.T. Course in the year 2009 and now working as Noon Meal Organizer at the Panchayat Union Middle School, Sarvoy with the salary of Rs.9,568/- The petitioner in W.P.No.7105 of 2018 Mrs.S.Sathiya completed B.Sc., in the year 2010, M.Sc., in the year 2014 and B.Ed., in the year 2012 and now working as Noon Meal Organizer at the Panchayat Union Middle School, Kariyanur, Veppanthathattai Taluk, Perambalur District.

¶17

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

¶18

In view of the above, they have submitted representations to the respondents 1 to 4 by registered post on 15.2.2018 to consider their case in the light of the recommendation made by the Director of School Education, Chennai, the third respondent herein in his proceeding bearing Na.Ka.No.10321/C2/ E2/2016 dated 10.11.2017 and the relevant portion thereof reads as follows:-

¶19

“vdnt. ,k;Kd;epfH;it gpd;gw;wpa[k; rK:f eyk; kw;Wk; rj;Jzt[ jpl;lj;Jiw muR Kjd;ikr; brayhsupd; fojj;jpd; mog;gilapYk; gs;spf; fy;tpj;Jiwapy; ,ilepiy Mrphpah; kw;Wk; gl;ljhhp Mrphpah; gjtpf;F eph;zapf;fg;gl;Ls;s fy;tpj;jFjp bgw;Ws;s 430 rj;Jzt [ gzpahsh;fs; kw;Wk; 341 m';fd;tho gzpahsh;fSf;F rpwg;g[ Mrphpah; jFjpj; njh;t[ xd;iw elj;jp eilKiwapy; cs;s njh;e;njhh; bgah; gl;oay; jahhpg;gjw;fhd tHpKiwfis gpd;gw;wp njh;r;rpbgWk; gzpahsh;fSf;F gs;spf; fy;tpj;Jiwapy; ,ilepiy Mrphpah; kw;Wk; gl;ljhhp Mrphpah; gzpepakdk; tH';FtJ Fwpj;J ghprPypf;fyhk; vdt [k; gzpt[ld; bjhptpf;fpd;nwd;/”

¶20

Since there has been a recommendation in favour of the petitioners to take part in the Special Examination to be conducted for the Noon Meal Organizers for the purpose of appointing them as Graduate Teachers, the Government has to pass final orders on the recommendation made by the third respondent. It is also submitted that the petitioners are also willing and keenly waiting to take part in the Special Examination, so that they could be appointed as Graduate Teachers, as they have got all the qualification. Therefore the said genuine and bona fide request made by the petitioners should be considered. As the recommendation made by the third respondent is pending indefinitely on the file of the first respondent, a direction is sought for.

¶21

The learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents submitted that although the third respondent has given his recommendation on 10.11.2017, the same is under the active consideration of the Government and suitable orders will be passed in due course.

¶22

Recording the said statement, considering the fact that the recommendation made by the third respondent to the first respondent is pending for a long time, this Court finds no impediment to direct the first respondent to pass appropriate orders. Accordingly, the first respondent is hereby directed to

¶23

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

¶24

consider the recommendation made by the third respondent dated 10.11.2017 and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, so as to enable the petitioners to take part in the Special Examination for appointment as Graduate Teachers in the Government and other schools as prayed for in their representations dated 15.2.2018. With this direction, all the writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶25

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)

¶26

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ss
To
1. The Secretary to Government
School Education Department
Fort St.George
Chennai 600 009
2. The Secretary to Government
Social Welfare & Nutritious Meal
Programme Department
Fort St.George
Chennai 600 009
3. The Director of School Education
College Road, Nungambakkam
Chennai 600 006
4. The Director of Social Welfare
Sidco Old Building, Guindy
Chennai 600 032
+5cc to Mr.P.Chandrasekar, Advocate, S.R.No.23572 to 23576
W.P.Nos.7101 to 7105 of 2018
RRK(19/04/2018)

¶27

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

Mrs.S.Sivasakthi, v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs.S.Sivasakthi, v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. K.Sutha Vs The Director

S.Pechiammal Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

The Executive Engineer Vs The Inspector of Labour

Sr. a. Rani Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

V.Sujatha D/o Vijayarangan, Vs The District Elementary

K.Sivakumar, Vs The Deputy Collector /